Development and application of test cases for comparing vertical ground heat exchanger models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this paper is to establish a set of test cases for analytical verifications and inter-model comparisons of 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 large yearly thermal imbalance in multiple borehole configurations. The usefulness of the proposed test cases is illustrated by running them with different GHX models. This comparison exercise has shown that 1-D models compare favourably well with the more elaborate 3-D models for relatively small simulation periods. The cyclic heat rejection/collection test has revealed some small deficiency in the load aggregation scheme of a particular model. Finally, the use of the asymmetric (cooling-dominated) load profile test case for a bore field composed of 100 boreholes revealed that the borehole wall temperature predicted by two GHX models can differ by as much as 10oC after a 30 year simulation.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".