Bibliographic record
Abstract
Infiltration has traditionally been assumed to contribute to the energy load of a building by an amount equal to the product of the infiltration flow rate and the enthalpy difference between inside and outside.Some studies have indicated that application of such a simple formula may produce an unreasonably high contribution because of heat recovery within the building envelope.The major objective of this study was to provide an improved prediction of the energy load due to infiltration by introducing a correction factor that multiplies the expression for the conventional load.This paper discusses simplified analytical modeling and CFD simulations that examine infiltration heat recovery (IHR) in an attempt to quantify the magnitude of this effect for typical building envelopes.For comparison, we will also briefly examine the results of some full-scale field measurements of IHR based on infiltration rates and energy use in real buildings.The results of this work showed that for houses with insulated walls the heat recovery is negligible due to the small fraction of the envelope that participates in heat exchange with the infiltrating air.However; there is the potential for IHR to have a significant effect for higher participation dynamic walls/ceilings or uninsulated walls.This result implies that the existing methods for evaluating infiltration related building loads provide adequate results for typical buildings.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".