MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7131064805 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.18070575

Timber-Reinforced Concrete Composite Construction System and Brock Commons Student Residence Example

2025· article· en· W7131064805 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Berrin Şahin Diri

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidenceSustainabilityCommonsProduction (economics)Composite numberBuilding materialBuilding constructionComposite construction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A composite structure is a building made from a combination of materials, such as steel, concrete and timber. These systems offer a more efficient construction method by utilising the superior properties of different materials. This study explains the timber-concrete composite construction system and its advantages using the Brock Commons Student Residence project in Canada as an example, and reveals the reasons for its selection. The timber-concrete composite system was chosen for Brock Commons due to the need for rapid construction, the abundance of timber production in Canada, the limited space available for a construction site given the building's location, and its sustainability advantages. Consequently, the seventeen-storey dormitory building was completed within seventy days. The building is economical, sustainable, environmentally friendly, lightweight and earthquake-resistant. Due to its prefabricated elements, on-site traffic is also minimised. The building uses a laminated timber column and floor system with two reinforced concrete cores.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicWood Treatment and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207