MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6891639398 · doi:10.4224/20386192

FIERAsystem Occupant Response (OCRM) and Occupant Evaluation (OEVM) Models theory report

2002· report· en· W6891639398 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2002
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFire protectionProbabilistic logicFire safetyBuilding codeProperty insuranceFire protection engineeringBuilding designProbabilistic risk assessment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As Canada and other countries move from prescriptive-based building codes to performance/objective-based codes, new design tools are needed to demonstrate that compliance with these new codes has been achieved. One such tool is the computer model FiRECAM, which has been developed over the past decade by the Fire Risk Management Program of the Institute for Research in Construction at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC). FiRECAM is a computer model for evaluating fire protection systems in residential and office buildings that can be used to compare the expected safety and cost of candidate fire protection options. To evaluate fire protection systems in light industrial buildings, a new computer model is being developed. This model, whose current focus is aircraft hangars and warehouses, is based on a framework that allows designers to establish objectives, select fire scenarios that may occur in the building and evaluate the impact of each of the selected scenarios on life safety, property protection and business interruption. The new computer model is called FIERAsystem, which stands for Fire Evaluation and Risk Assessment system. FIERAsystem uses time-dependent deterministic and probabilistic models to evaluate the impact of selected fire scenarios on life, property and business interruption. The mainFIERAsystem submodels calculate fire development, smoke movement through a building, time of failure of building elements and occupant response and evacuation. In addition, there are submodels dealing with the effectiveness of fire suppression systems and the response of fire departments. The Occupant Response Model (OCRM) is used to estimate the probabilities of occupants starting to evacuate a building at different times in the event of a fire. The probabilities to commence evacuation and the delay times computed by OCRM are then used by the Occupant Evacuation Model (OEVM) which calculates occupant movementfrom their location to the exterior of the building. This information is used by the Expected Number of Deaths Model to estimate how many occupants in the building would perish during the fire. OCRM also calculates the probability of fire department notification and the expected notification time. In this report, the theory basis of OCRM and OEVM is described, as well as the various factors used in the models.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARC→French-language works237,207→