MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018108781 · doi:10.1177/0143624411428951

The use of UKCP09 to produce weather files for building simulation

2012· article· en· W2018108781 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
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

VenueBuilding Services Engineering Research and Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersResearch Councils UKCanadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer ControlEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilImpact Fund
KeywordsConsistency (knowledge bases)Computer scienceExtreme weatherBuilding energy simulationMorphingProduct (mathematics)Climate changeArchitectural engineeringEfficient energy useEnergy performanceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditionally, hourly weather years such as the test reference years (TRYs) and design summer years (DSYs) have been used for building energy and thermal performance analysis. Until recently, these weather datasets were based on observed measurements, but the need to adapt buildings to the impacts of likely future climate change has introduced a requirement to incorporate climate projections, such as the UK Climate Projections (UKCP09), into building performance analysis. Four research projects, funded by the EPSRC, examined the use of UKCP09 data, and the associated Weather Generator tool, in producing weather files appropriate for building simulation. A methodology called ‘morphing’, previously used to create the currently available to practitioners, UK Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP02) based, CIBSE Future Weather Years, will also be discussed here as a potential alternative for the production of UKCP09-based weather files. This article reviews all above methodologies developed to produce weather files for building simulation, using the UKCP09 projections, and discusses their benefits and limitations as well as their ease of use by designers. Practical application: This article aims to provide a comprehensive review of the various methodologies currently available for the production of future weather files for building thermal and energy performance simulation using the UKCP09 projections. This analysis aims to provide users with the benefits and limitations associated with each methodology and end product based on their accessibility, consistency with other currently used datasets, computational resources required and spatial availability.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.269 · 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