MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132886315

Uncertainty in Quantification of Material Use and Embodied Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Single-Family Dwellings

2023· dissertation· W7132886315 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Aldrick Arceo

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2023
Typedissertation
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsGreenhouse gasEmbodied energyEmbodied cognitionBuilding materialClimate changeBuilding design
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reducing embodied greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the construction of buildings is globally recognized as important for meeting climate targets. However, quantitative understanding of building material use is limited and employing material efficiency strategies to reduce building embodied and global GHG emissions is underutilized. This dissertation advances the understanding of building material intensity (MI) and embodied GHG intensity with specific focus on single-family dwellings (SFD). The thesis examines the uncertainty and variability associated with current and practical approaches to built environment industrial ecology and building regulations, the variation in MI and embodied GHG emissions within and between cities, and the potential for material efficiency strategies to reduce embodied GHG emissions in SFDs. The three central chapters build an evidence-based approach to advance understanding of MI in SFDs and then combine MI with material GHG intensity to investigate embodied GHG emissions. Chapter 3 investigates variations in MI and implications for uncertainty in MI research focusing on buildings within one city (Toronto, Canada). Chapter 4 expands on this and examines differences in MI both within and between places with investigation of buildings in Toronto, Canada, Perth, Australia, and Luzon, Philippines. In Chapter 5, embodied GHG intensity is estimated and examined to determine whether the observed ranges of MI or material GHG intensity drive overall embodied GHG emissions of buildings. Three design and material strategies (light-weight design of structures, more intensive building use, very low GHG material substitution) are evaluated for their potential to reduce embodied GHG emissions of housing construction. Through the study of 80 buildings across three locations, this dissertation identifies important implications of uncertainty and variability within and between locations, determines implications of functional unit selection on interpreting MI, and identifies large contributors and drivers of building material use and embodied GHG emissions. The findings support uncertainty examination in bottom-up MFAs and inform building regulations on the use of functional units when developing benchmarks for building material and embodied GHG estimates. Material intensity and embodied GHG interventions for housing are location and context specific, but regardless of location, constructing smaller houses would reduce overall MI and embodied GHG emissions.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207