MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132067000

Liquid-applied air barrier systems for high-rise buildings: code requirements and performance testing

2018· article· en· W7132067000 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Marzieh Riahinezhad, J-F. Masson, Michael Lacasse, Bruno Di Lenardo, Peter Collins

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSmart Materials for Construction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuilding envelopeDurabilityBuilding codeNational standardEnvelope (radar)Code (set theory)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Air barrier systems (ABS) are specified in Canadian codes to minimize the infiltration and exfiltration of air through the building envelope in order to control the risk of condensation. However, since the publication of the Energy Code of Canada in 2014, more attention has been drawn to the importance of an air barrier system to control the loss of energy. Recently, the Canadian Construction Material Centre (CCMC) developed performance criteria for liquid-applied ABS, including installation, barrier, and durability criteria. The CCMC is a recognized body that provides guidance to building officials with respect to the National Building Code of Canada (NBC) and the evaluation and testing of innovative products as alternative solutions meeting the requirements of the NBC. The performance criteria for an ABS will be of interest to air barrier material and air barrier system providers, architects, industry consultants, and contractors.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicSmart Materials for ConstructionFrench-language works237,207