MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100691866

Development of Performance-Based Codes,

2007· article· en· W7100691866 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire dynamics and safety research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)HarmonizationSet (abstract data type)Fire safetyCode (set theory)Safety standardsBuilding code
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the results of a literature survey, undertaken by the National Research Council of Canada, on the efforts to move from prescriptive building regulations to performancebased regulations. This survey has revealed that, in recent years, in many countries around the world, building codes are moving from prescriptive- to performance-based requirements. This increasing world-wide tendency to move toward performance-based codes is due, in part, to the negative aspects of the prescriptive codes, to advances made in fire science and engineering, to the need for codes to use fire safety engineering principles within the context of their regulations, and to the global harmonization of regulation systems. In addition, a performance-based code approach improves the regulatory environment by establishing clear code objectives and safety criteria and leaving the means of achieving these objectives to the designer. Hence, the codes will be more flexible in allowing innovation and more functional. Performance-based codes will also permit the use of modelling tools for measuring the performance of any number of design alternatives against the established safety levels. In this way, improved fire safety designs at reduced costs might be achieved. This paper also describes the required steps for developing performance-based codes. The description outlines a set of objectives formulated based on a combination of international formulations. Also presented are some of the performance design criteria for quantifying the desired fire safety objectives and some of the existing fire safety design tools for quantifying the performance objectives. The full utilization of the existing tools in performance-based design will depend on the systems in place...

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFire dynamics and safety researchFrench-language works237,207