MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6910176537 · doi:10.4224/20378854

Environmental satisfaction in open-plan environment: 2. Effect of workstation size, partition height and windows

2002· report· en· W6910176537 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2002
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPublic Works and Government Services CanadaNatural Resources CanadaSteelcase
KeywordsWorkstationControl (management)Partition (number theory)Modular designOffice workersUser satisfactionPallet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Open-plan office designs are characterised by modular furniture and moveable partitions that partially screen office occupants from co-workers occupying the same office space. Such designs are argued to provide a flexible working environment, to offer space and cost savings and to promote communication between office occupants. However, research suggests that open-plan office occupants may experience a lack of both visual and acoustical privacy and an increase in the amount of unwanted distractions and interruptions. In addition, the proposed benefits regarding improved communication are often not realised. Furthermore, open-plan occupants sometimes experience unfavourable ambient conditions, partly because of the lack of control resulting from a shared office space.

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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.332
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCFrench-language works237,207