MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Electric Thermal Storage Option for Nova Scotia Power Customers: A Case Study of a Typical Electrically Heated Nova Scotia House

2011· article· en· W1576543551 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaNova (rocket)Environmental scienceElectricityElectric powerHeating systemEngineeringPower (physics)Electrical engineeringMechanical engineeringGeographyPhysicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Nova Scotia Power (NS Power) offers an incentive to the owners of electrically heated houses in Nova Scotia to switch from conventional electric baseboard heaters to electric thermal storage (ETS) systems and enjoy the rebated time-of-day (TOD) electricity rates. For this study, a statistically representative, electrically heated, existing Nova Scotia house was modeled in the building energy simulation software ESP-r to estimate its peak heating load and hourly heating energy consumption for an entire year. Based on the ESP-r simulation results, the ETS system was sized for the house, and the energy cost saving realized with this system was estimated. It was found that, compared to conventional electric baseboard heating system, the ETS heating system can save 41–48% in the heating cost on an annual basis, yielding a simple-payback (SPB) period for this retrofit of less than eight years.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.190 · 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