MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6966713277 · doi:10.4224/20378857

Report from Task 4 of MEWS Project: Task 4: Environmental Conditions: final report

2002· report· en· W6966713277 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2002
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndex (typography)Task (project management)Parametric statisticsMewsMoistureCategorization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Task 4 - Environmental Conditions consisted of two main objectives: the first objective was to provide input for the parametric simulation phase of Task 7- Hygrothermal Analysis and the rain penetration test portion of Task 6 - System Performance; the second objective was to develop a method for classifying for US and Canadian climates with respect to moisture loading. Hourly weather data for approximately 400 Canadian and US locations were collected. The data spans 30 or more years. A list of 40 candidate cities was created from the locations available. Data for the 40 cities, 27 American and 13 Canadian, were analyzed and converted into the appropriate format for the Advanced Hygrothermal Model (AHM). A method for calculating a moisture index based on two independent indices, the wetting index and the drying index was developed characterize the locations in the 40 city set. From the candidate list five cities were selected: Wilmington NC, Seattle WA, Ottawa ON, Winnipeg MB, and Phoenix AZ for detailed analysis. Reference years to be input to the AHM as part of the parametric study were determined for each of the five cities selected for detailed analysis. A modified method for calculating the moisture index cities was used to select reference years. The modified method included the effect of wind-driven rain and the effect of orientation. For selecting reference years the definition of the wetting index included the direction of predominantrainfall. A wet year, a dry year, and an average year were defined as reference years for each of the five selected cities. Finally, five methods of calculating wind driven rain were reviewed and found to be ingeneral agreement. Experimental results confirm the validity of the methods reviewed. Straube's method for calculating the amount of wind driven rain impinging on a wall was selected for use. It was chosen because it is generally the most conservative of the methods considered and was also the method selected for incorporation into the AHM. Two spray rates, 100 L/m 2 -h (1.7 L/min-m 2 ) and 200 L/m 2 -h (3.4 L/min-m 2 ) and a maximum pressure level of 700 Pa +/- 300 Pa cycled at 0.5 Hz were determined from the literature and climate data. These recommendations were used in the rain penetration portion of Task 6. The second objective was to develop a method for classifying climates with respect to moisture loading. Climates were classified using a similar method used to classify the 40 candidate cities. Climates were classified according to their potential for moisture loading. Five groups were defined: Zone 1, Zone 2, Zone 3, Zone 4, and Zone 5. A provisional contour map showing isopotentials for Canada and the United States was created.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.004

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.250 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCFrench-language works237,207