MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6891586288 · doi:10.4224/40002013

National Energy Code of Canada for Buildings: 2015

2015· standard· en· W6891586288 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2015
Typestandard
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationCommissionGovernment (linguistics)Building codeCode (set theory)Consistency (knowledge bases)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Energy Code of Canada for Buildings 2015, together with the National Building Code of Canada 2015, the National Plumbing Code of Canada 2015 and the National Fire Code of Canada 2015, is an objective-based National Model Code that can be adopted by provincial and territorial governments. Codes Canada are developed by the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes (CCBFC). In Canada, provincial and territorial governments have the authority to enact legislation that regulates building design and construction within their jurisdictions. This legislation may include the adoption of the National Energy Code for Buildings (NECB) without change or with modifications to suit local needs, and the enactment of other laws and regulations regarding building design and construction, including the requirements for professional involvement. The NECB is a model code in the sense that it helps promote consistency among provincial and territorial building codes. Persons involved in the design or construction of a building should consult the provincial or territorial government concerned to find out which construction requirements are applicable. This edition of the NECB succeeds the 2011 edition. The development of the NECB 2015 has been a collaborative effort involving the National Research Council of Canada (NRC), Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) and other stakeholders. NRCan’s financial and technical contributions will improve the energy efficiency of new buildings and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The NECB 2015

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.029

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARC→French-language works237,207→