Redesigning Terraced Social Housing in the UK for Flexibility Using Building Energy Simulation with Consideration of Passive Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A chosen case study house forms the basis of this paper, which is a pilot energy-efficient social housing project, completed by one of the largest housing developers in the UK. The main aim of this study is to inform the redesign of flexible energy-efficient housing units. The housing, designed for social tenants, was built by the Accent Group in 2005, using modern construction methods and sustainable materials, based on extensive research from the adaptable and “Grow Home” principles of Avi Friedman as well as open building implementation. The first pilot scheme was designed in collaboration with the Building Energy Analysis Unit at the University of Sheffield, together with the Goddard Wybor Practise, and was a successful housing development with respect to being environmentally friendly and a low-energy design scheme for the UK climate. This paper presents redesigning of flexible terraced housing units, and their performance evaluation, using a building simulation method as well as the passive-house planning package. The aim was to plan a row of terraced houses that can not only utilize a flexible design concept in floor planning layout, but also to reduce energy consumption with a passive design with particular attention paid to material selection. In addition, building simulation work has been carried out with the use of DesignBuilder software for both thermal and energy performance evaluation. The study examines the annual energy performance and comfort conditions in the designed house to be situated in the Northeast of England, UK. A terraced house unit design is considered a flexible home that can adjust to the needs of different tenants for the purpose of achieving a sustainable building under different aspects, such as low energy, low carbon, use of renewables, and low impact materials, with flexibility by design.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".