MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408091282 · doi:10.3390/buildings15050798

Moisture Ingress in Building Envelope Materials: (I) Scientometric Analysis and Experimental Fundamentals

2025· article· en· W4408091282 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Yari, Elnaz Esmizadeh, Esrat Jahan, Itzel Lopez‐Carreon, Marzieh Riahinezhad, Jacynthe Touchette, Zhe Xiao, Michael Lacasse, Elena Dragomirescu

Bibliographic record

VenueBuildings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHygrothermal properties of building materials
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuilding envelopeEnvelope (radar)MoistureMaterials scienceEngineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineering physicsAerospace engineeringPhysicsComposite materialMeteorologyThermal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Moisture ingress is a critical concern in buildings, as it may profoundly affect structural integrity, the energy efficiency of a building, and as well the quality of the indoor environment that, in turn, could influence the health and safety of building occupants. Moisture ingress can occur during any phase in the lifecycle of a building component, where environmental loads, such as precipitation, wind, snow, and elevated relative humidity, play a fundamental role in affecting the building structure. Climate change exacerbates the issue of moisture ingress by intensifying these loads. In this review paper, the statistical perspective on publications related to moisture ingress in building envelope materials (BEMs) was first assessed through a scientometric study. All relevant publications were gathered and manually filtered, and the selected papers were categorized based on the topics discussed. The results of the scientometric study, as presented in this paper, include a bar chart in which the number of publications in each category is illustrated; a science journal mapping diagram showing the interdisciplinary connections of the research; a cluster map depicting the network between topics; and an R&D momentum analysis reflecting the rate of growth and publication count in this field. Given the strong focus on material properties, this review also examines experimental methods for characterizing moisture transport properties in building materials used in BEMs. Additionally, the differences between various codes and standards centered on this topic are reviewed and discussed. This combined strategy is intended to comprehensively evaluate available information and approaches to permit identifying the knowledge gaps that need to be addressed.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.094
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.094
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0680.121
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuildingsSame topicHygrothermal properties of building materialsFrench-language works237,207