MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035705602 · doi:10.1115/1.2889010

Impact of Residential Fuel Cell System Parameters on Its Economic Assessment

2008· article· en· W2035705602 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fuel Cell Science and Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicEnergy, Environment, Agriculture Analysis
Canadian institutionsHydro-Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCogenerationMonte Carlo methodAutomotive engineeringHeating systemBattery (electricity)Energy consumptionEngineeringEnvironmental scienceProcess engineeringWaste managementElectrical engineeringElectricity generationMechanical engineeringPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluates different fuel cell system configurations for residential applications from an economic standpoint. The evaluation is made using a Monte Carlo simulation for different building types, heating systems, and rate structures. Electric and thermal energy produced and used, energy from the grid, and gas consumption are evaluated using a frequency energy model. This frequency model is based on detailed energy consumption measurements. Sensitivity analysis shows that the parameters defining the potential residential market are building type, utility rates, and heating systems. These are not related to fuel cell system characteristics. In general, the systems offering the lower annual net payment are fuel cells with Pnom about 1kW, no battery, cogeneration system for space heating and domestic hot water heating.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.232 · 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