MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6962747472 · doi:10.17632/pcmnjy69gv

Extreme weather events AMY weather file

2023· dataset· en· W6962747472 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMendeley Data · 2023
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtreme weatherResilience (materials science)Climate changeWeather stationSurface weather observationExtreme heatNumerical weather predictionExtreme value theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building performance simulation in extreme conditions is crucial for improving the resilience of buildings to withstand climate change-induced weather events. Using Actual Meteorological Year weather files instead of Typical Meteorological Year files allows for accurate estimation of building performance during such extreme conditions, enabling the assessment of vulnerabilities and areas that require improvement. The approach applies to both existing buildings needing climate change-resilient retrofits and new building designs that must be compatible with future climatic conditions. The intensification and frequency increase of these extreme weather events make developing adaptation and resilient-building measures imperative, involving understanding potential losses households may experience due to the intensification of extreme events. Addressing the knowledge gap caused by the absence of an AMY weather file dataset is essential for accurate BPS during past extreme climate change-induced weather events. This article introduces a comprehensive .epw format weather file dataset focusing on historical extreme weather events in Canada, encompassing a diverse array of past occurrences in various locations, allowing for better estimation of thermal performance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.017

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.179 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMendeley DataFrench-language works237,207