MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7027046738

Benchmarking 3D thermal model against field measurement on the thermal response of an insulating concrete form (ICF) wall in cold climate

2010· article· en· W7027046738 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHygrothermal properties of building materials
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsScope (computer science)Work (physics)Field (mathematics)Heat transmissionTransient (computer programming)BenchmarkingThermalExperimental data
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Field monitoring of the dynamic heat transmission characteristics through Insulating ConcreteForm (ICF) wall assemblies was undertaken in 2009-2010 at National Research Council Canada's Institute for Research in Construction's (NRC-IRC) Field Exposure of Walls Facility (FEWF). The main objective of this research is to evaluate the dynamic heat transmission characteristics through two mid-scale ICF wall assemblies in FEWF for a one year cycle of exposure to outdoor natural weathering conditions. The scope of work included the design of the experiments, installation of test specimens, commissioning of the instrumentation, operation of the test facility, monitoring, and data collection & analysis. The present NRC-IRC's hygrothermal model, called hygIRC-C, was used to interpret the readings of the instrumentations and to improve the experiment design by repositioning these instrumentations at critical locations. Subsequently, the present model was benchmarked against the measured data. Results showed that the predictions of the present model are in good agreement with experimental data. This research is on-going. Future work will be presented in later publications where the present model will be used to conduct numerical simulations in order to investigate the transient thermal response of full-scale ICF wall assemblies subjected to different Canadian climates.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.638

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.195 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicHygrothermal properties of building materialsFrench-language works237,207