MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7051568881

Paritalon rakennusmateriaalien kustannusarvio Suomen ja Viron hinnoilla

2018· other· fi· W7051568881 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTheseus (Ammattikorkeakoulujen) · 2018
Typeother
Languagefi
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Plasma Interactions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Value (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Opinnäytetyön tarkoituksena oli selvittää paritalon rakennusmateriaalien kustannusarvion laskeminen Suomen ja Viron hinnoilla. Tarkoituksena oli tutkia ja laskea, tulisiko halvemmaksi tilata Virosta rakennusmateriaalit paritalotyömaalle kuin ostaa vastaavat tarvikkeet Suomesta. \n \nTyön esimerkkikohde oli 224 m2:n kokoinen paritalo. Määrälaskentaa varten tarvittavat kuvat mallinnettiin Vertex- ja AutoCad-ohjelmilla. Määrälaskenta suoritettiin Excel-pohjaisella laskentaohjelmalla. Rakennusmateriaalien hinnat saatiin Suomesta pääsääntöisesti K-Raudan nettikaupasta. Virosta vastaavat tuotteet löytyivät virolaisista nettikaupoista. Saadut hinnat laitettiin Excelin kustannuslaskentapohjaan ja näin saa-tiin molempien maiden rakennusmateriaalien kustannusarviot. \n \nRakennusmateriaalien hinnoista vertailtiin arvolisäverottomia hyllyhintoja, jotta saadut summat olisivat vertailukelpoisia. Tuloksista kävi ilmi, että opinnäytetyön esimerkkikohteessa rakennusmateriaalien kustannukset olisivat noin 20 000 euroa halvempia kuin Suomessa ostettuna. Rakennusmateriaalien hinnat päivittyvät koko ajan, joten tässä opinnäytetyössä saadut tulokset ovat suuntaa-antavia.

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)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0530.016

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheseus (Ammattikorkeakoulujen)Same topicLaser-Plasma Interactions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207