MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406343460 · doi:10.1121/10.0034994

Investigating embodied carbon of common floor ceiling assemblies and low carbon buildups to meet new requirements

2024· article· en· W4406343460 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aedan Callaghan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasArchitectural engineeringEngineeringArchitectureEmbodied cognitionBuilding designBuilt environmentCivil engineeringConstruction engineeringComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The buildings and construction sector is known to be the largest global emitter of greenhouse gasses, representing 37% of all emissions. International building regulations are poised to incorporate embodied carbon targets for new building construction, with restrictions expected to become stricter over time. California became the first state to add embodied carbon emission control as part of the California Green Building Standards Code. Some cities are also enacting policies like Toronto where new city owned buildings must demonstrate less than 350kg/CO2/m2. With this increased focus and requirements, whole building life cycle assessments will become an important tool in the architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) design process. These evolving environmental regulations demand a deeper understanding of the relationship between the acoustic performance and embodied carbon of common assemblies. This work compares this relationship in several construction types, including concrete, mass timber, and wood frame assemblies. This relationship is evaluated by using environmental product declarations (EPDs) and acoustic testing of various assembly types to offer a holistic comparison of the performance metrics. The findings will support development of best practices for selecting materials and acoustic design approaches to balance low embodied carbon with high acoustic performance and support the construction industry to meet future environmental standards.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability→French-language works237,207→