MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328760277 · doi:10.3384/ecp110573153

Integrated Community Energy Modelling: Developing Map-Based Models to Support Energy and Emissions Planning in Canadian Communities

2011· article· en· W2328760277 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jessica Wagner Webster, Brett Korteling, Katelyn Margerm, John Beaton

Bibliographic record

VenueLinköping electronic conference proceedings · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy consumptionEnergy managementOrder (exchange)Energy (signal processing)Efficient energy useIdentification (biology)Adaptation (eye)Computer sciencePerspective (graphical)Knowledge managementEnvironmental economicsBusinessProcess managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new tool is presented in this article.The main objective is the improvement of the small and medium companies' energy management systems in order to obtain energy savings and the adaptation of the organizations according to the recognized standard UNE-EN 16001:2010.The application of the tool lets companies reduce their energy consumption and improve their processes in an energy efficiency perspective.The methodology is based in questionnaires and tests which will report information in order to identify all standard requirements.In a near future, the expected benefits are going to be a knowledge about the companies' EMS situation, information to prioritize actions to improve, identification of critical areas, comparison between different EMS evaluation results (for example: company' EMS with industry average, etc.), improve companies knowledge about energy, energy efficiency, etc.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLinköping electronic conference proceedingsSame topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207