MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409212235 · doi:10.3390/buildings15071192

A Comparative Whole-Building Life Cycle Assessment of the Four Framing Systems of the Bakers Place Building Using the Tally LCA Tool

2025· article· en· W4409212235 on OpenAlexafffund
Nadia Zahabi, Hongmei Gu, Meng Gong, Janet Blackadar

Bibliographic record

VenueBuildings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNew Brunswick Innovation Foundation
KeywordsFraming (construction)Architectural engineeringLife-cycle assessmentEngineeringCivil engineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The urgent need for climate change mitigation has increased the focus on reducing embodied carbon and energy, particularly in the construction sector. Utilizing sustainably sourced mass timber products provides a low-carbon alternative to traditional concrete and steel structural systems in buildings. These carbon impacts can be quantified by evaluating the total environmental impact of a building, from material extraction and product manufacturing to construction, operation, and demolition. This study evaluated the environmental impacts of a 14-storey mass timber–steel hybrid building in Madison, USA, through a Whole-Building Life Cycle Assessment (WBLCA) using the Tally LCA tool integrated with Autodesk Revit. The hybrid design was compared to full mass timber, full steel, and post-tensioned concrete structures, which are common structural systems for high-rise buildings, enabling meaningful comparisons of their environmental performance. The results showed that the full mass timber design had the lowest global warming potential (GWP), reducing emissions by 16% compared to the concrete structure. The hybrid design achieved a 14% reduction, with both timber-based systems demonstrating about 30% lower non-renewable energy use. In addition, they provided significant biogenic carbon storage during the building’s lifespan. However, the mass timber and hybrid systems showed higher impacts in categories such as acidification, eutrophication, ozone depletion, and smog formation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuildingsSame topicEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207