Large-scale laboratory measurements and benchmarking of an advanced hygrothermal model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hygrothermal performance of a building envelope system is dictated by the response of the system to combined heat, air and moisture fluctuations produced by exterior and interior conditions that exist on either side of the envelope. Recent research in the field of assessment of hygrothermal response has focused either on laboratory experimentation or on modelling, but less work has been reported in which both aspects are combined. Indeed, it is generally acknowledged that assessing the hygrothermal performance of building envelope systems is both expensive and time consuming. Such type of studies can potentially offer useful information regarding the benchmarking of models and related methods to assess hygrothermal performance of wall assemblies. This paper reports on the use of an advanced hygrothermal computer model hygIRC to assess the hygrothermal response of various components in wood-frame wall assemblies when subjected to nominally steady-state environmental conditions. The model uses hygrothermal properties of materials derived from tests on small-scale specimens undertaken in the laboratory. A comparison is made of results obtained from computer model simulation to those derived from tests on large-scale specimens in controlled laboratory measurements. The experimental results were subsequently used to help benchmark the model. Specifically, this model was implemented, in this series of simulations, to assess the drying rate of various combinations of sheathing membranes in close contact with wood-based sheathing. Details of the experiments and of the results obtained from comparison of experiment and simulation are reported.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".