MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7062035053

A simulation-based review of the ubiquitous window-head-height to daylit zone depth rule-of-thumb

2005· article· en· W7062035053 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Power Generation Technologies
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFacadeDaylightDaylightingRule of thumbRadianceComplement (music)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reviews the validity of the ubiquitous daylighting rule of thumb (DRT) that relates window-head-height to the depth of the daylit area adjacent to a facade. Different versions of the rule taken from prominent daylighting design guides and norms are presented. A formal link is established between the depth of the daylit zone and the simulated daylight autonomy distribution in a space. Based on this link daylit zone depths of rectangular sidelit spaces are simulated using Radiance for a variety of climates, facade orientations, facade geometries, and usage patterns. Simulation results largely support predictions made by DRT for standard design variants. At the same time they demonstrate the limitations of the rule and promote daylight simulations as a natural complement to the rule if more advanced daylighting systems are investigated.

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.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.251 · 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