MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7036618160

Connecting the building sciences and health sciences in Canada: research gaps

2009· article· en· W7036618160 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRelativity and Gravitational Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth Canada
KeywordsState (computer science)Human scienceBiomedical sciencesHealth sciencePublic health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadians spend most of their time indoors. There is mounting evidence that the conditions they experience - air, light, sound, interior design, materials, and architectural features - influence their health. These effects may disproportionately occur in vulnerable populations, defined by individual, socioeconomic, cultural or geographic characteristics. In November 2008, the First Canadian Building and Health Sciences Workshop brought together Canadian researchers to identify the state of the science on buildings and health and to identify a way forward to improve the state of knowledge in Canada. This paper summarizes the state of knowledge and identifies research gaps as a first step in that process.

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)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicRelativity and Gravitational TheoryFrench-language works237,207