MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318451209 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2013-0235

Large-scale building simulation using cloud computing for estimating lifecycle energy consumption

2014· article· en· W2318451209 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Russell Richman, Hayes E. Zirnhelt, Stuart C. Fix

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingPython (programming language)Computer scienceEnergy consumptionEnergy budgetThermostatProcess (computing)Efficient energy useSupercomputerScale (ratio)Building energy simulationDistributed computingSimulationOperating systemEnergy performanceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of whole building simulation is increasing to support the design process. Often it is desirable to evaluate many scenarios, however the simulation time involved presents a significant barrier. Simulationists are forced to reduce the number of scenarios evaluated to meet time constraints. With cloud computing, simulationists can significantly reduce the total simulation time by allocating portions of the simulations to multiple processor cores. The benefit of cloud computing is demonstrated through a case study project, which computes the lifecycle energy consumption (LEC) of 1 080 000 single detached home design scenarios in Toronto, for a budget of CAN$2400. Code was written using Python to couple EnergyPlus and ATHENA IE to modify input files, process results and calculate LEC. The results of this study suggest that utilizing cloud computing to simulate large scenario studies represents an efficient method that is beginning to surface in mainstream building 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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.726
Threshold uncertainty score0.727

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207