Do green buildings outperform conventional buildings? Indoor environment and energy performance in North American offices
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A comprehensive post-occupancy investigation of the performance of “green” and “conventional” office buildings has been completed. The study included occupant surveys and physical building and energy use data collected from 24 buildings (12 green, 12 conventional) across Canada and the northern US. Occupants completed a questionnaire with items related to environmental satisfaction, job satisfaction and organizational commitment, health and well-being, environmental attitudes, and commuting behaviour. In total we recorded valid surveys from 2545 occupants. In addition, we conducted on-site physical measurements at each building. At a sample of workstations we collected data on prevailing thermal conditions, air quality, acoustics, and lighting. In addition, we recorded workstation size, ceiling height, window access and shading, electric lighting system, and surface finishes. In total we recorded valid data from 974 workstations.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it