MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993402950 · doi:10.3992/jgb.5.2.32

Solar Architecture and Energy Engineering

2010· article· en· W1993402950 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexandre Pavlovski, J. W. Fletcher, В. П. Костылев, J. D. Crace

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Green Building · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Department of Health and WellnessPowertech Labs (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectureArchitectural engineeringSolar energyEngineeringSystems engineeringCivil engineeringComputer scienceElectrical engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The modern built environment has been developed in a context of readily-available, low-cost energy from highly concentrated fossil fuels. Today's global energy landscape has dramatically changed; energy costs have become significant in the operation of buildings, and the sector uses a major portion of the global resources of fossil fuels. In recent years a major focus of green building development in North America and internationally has been on setting up sustainable energy practices for the built environment. This focus has advanced energy conservation and efficiency measures for buildings; on-site clean energy generation is now positioned as a critical next step in meeting increasing energy demands while enhancing the functionality and comfort of buildings. “Solar Architecture” as a green building concept addresses sustainable energy practices and the needs of the three major tiers of the built environment: community planning, existing buildings, and new construction. This article uses a case study of integrating renewable energy engineering into university campus energy planning to demonstrate some of the roles energy engineering plays in our built environment. As part of a master planning process for Dalhousie University, solar energy generation potential mapping and the SolarStarRating™ system were used to facilitate the integration of solar technologies into the community energy mix. The process identified the buildings most suited to retrofitting with solar technologies, and enabled the best opportunities to be investigated.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.163 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Green BuildingSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207