MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7017608185

Bâtiments en bois de hauteur moyenne : améliorer les produits à base de bois pour permettre des constructions plus hautes

2013· article· fr· W7017608185 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEuropean Socioeconomic and Political Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Sugar industryPilotage
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le Canada s’étant donné comme objectif de devenir l’un des plus gros marchés de la construction dans le monde d’ici 2020, la pression se fait de plus en plus forte pour autoriser la construction de bâtiments à ossature de bois ayant entre 5 et 12 étages de hauteur. Des projets pilotes ont déjà démontré les avantages économiques importants – dont des coûts de construction moindres et des délais de réalisation plus courts – qui peuvent être réalisés en utilisant du bois dans les bâtiments de moyenne hauteur.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.855

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicEuropean Socioeconomic and Political StudiesFrench-language works237,207