Viability Evaluation of Domestic Solar Hot Water Systems using two Multi Criteria Evaluation Techniques: Case Study of an Urban Area in India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the proven favourable techno-economic feasibilities along with the organised promotional measures, solar hot water systems are not diffused to the extent they should be, even in the domestic front of urban India where the potential for such dissemination is high. The reasons for such a low dissemination of domestic solar hot water systems (DSHWS) could be due to multi-criteria covering various dimensions of viability of domestic water heating options. This paper presents the work taken up to study the viability of DSHWS vis-à-vis other competing water heating options, on multi-criteria covering technical, economic, commercial, social and behavioural dimension in the urban India context, with a special reference to Bangalore. The strengths and weaknesses, significant dimensions and criteria for better dissemination of DSHWS vis-à-vis other competing water heating options, as obtained from the analysis using two multi criteria evaluation techniques viz. PROMETHEE and AHP are presented.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".