Comparing vertical ground heat exchanger models
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this article is to establish a set of test cases for analytical verification and inter-model comparison of vertical ground heat exchanger (GHX) models used in building simulation programs. Several test cases are suggested. They range from steady-state heat rejection in a single borehole to varying hourly loads with relatively large yearly thermal imbalance in multiple borehole configurations. The usefulness of the proposed test cases is illustrated with different GHX models. This comparison exercise has shown that analytical one-dimensional (1D) models compare favourably well with three-dimensional (3D) models for relatively short-simulation periods, where axial effects are not significant. Cyclic heat rejection/collection tests proved to be useful to characterize the accuracy and the computational performance of different load aggregation algorithms. Finally, different spatial superposition methods have been compared for various bore field sizes and configurations and various loads.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it