MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6892130796 · doi:10.48619/ais.v6i1.1173

Designing Green Architecture Building that Blend with the Nature

2025· article· en· W6892130796 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityBuilt environmentGovernment (linguistics)Environmental qualityHuman settlementProcurementNatural resourceSustainable developmentArchitecture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The urbanized built environment is expanding rapidly in developing nations, and there is an urgent need to implement green building principles to make design and construction methods there more sustainable. Cities have seen an increase in built-up areas, and new construction projects that use the green building idea can undoubtedly lessen the environmental impact of buildings. However, the region surrounding urban settlements was likely occupied prior to the second millennium BC, and there is proof that people have lived there continuously from at least the sixth century B.C. Therefore, in addition to new construction, there is a significant chance that existing structures could have a negative environmental impact if their maintenance and operation practices are not examined. Government regulations pertaining to energy and water use as well as CO2 emissions will need to include mandatory limitations. The performance of existing buildings can be enhanced by a number of important sustainability improvements, in addition to energy and water efficiency, such as structural evaluation, resource use, disaster resilience, waste reduction through recycling programs, sustainable procurement and purchasing practices, and continuing operations and maintenance practices. Employee comfort and indoor environmental quality are two "intangible" benefits of green buildings that are difficult to measure but just as crucial to consider as the tangible ones. "Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ)" includes things like views, air quality, natural lighting, thermal and physical comfort, and the ability to manage one's surroundings, all of which have beneficial psychological and physical benefits and help make residents happier and healthier.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.384 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207