Supplementary files for "Using Digitized Building and Weather Records to Improve the Accuracy of Ground to Roof Snow Load Ratio Estimations"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reliability targeted snow loads (RTLs) measure the weight in accumulated snow (i.e. snow load) that a roof is required to support to ensure the probability of failure is suf- ficiently low. This calculation has historically relied upon a probability distribution that characterizes the ratio between the annual maximum ground snow load to the annual max- imum roof snow load, a quantity referred to as Gr. The best available data for estimating Gr comes from Canadian case studies from the 1950s and 1960s. However, much of the data was never digitized, with only approximations of data being made available in scanned versions of printed graphs. As a result, existing models for Gr are based upon limited information that often fails to account for the interaction between a structure’s geometry and the surrounding environment as it relates to roof snow retention. This thesis digitizes data from these Canadian case studies and develops new models of Gr that better account for the effects of building geometry and wind speeds on roof snow retention. Using the dig- itized Canadian data, these new models improve the prediction accuracy in Gr compared to previous modeling efforts. To apply models from Canadian data to use in the United States, gridded estimations of weather variables are used to model Gr in place of digitized data from the Canadian reports. These gridded estimations of weather data do not improve prediction accuracy like the models using the digitized data, suggesting that site-specific variations in wind and exposure effects not captured in gridded weather maps are necessary for accurately predicting Gr.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".