MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2410323937 · doi:10.1080/2093761x.2016.1172279

The adoption of green roofs for the retrofitting of existing buildings in the Mediterranean climate

2016· article· en· W2410323937 on OpenAlexaff
Antonio Gagliano, Maurizio Detommaso, Francesco Nocera, Umberto Berardi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetrofittingEnvironmental scienceNatural ventilationAir conditioningRoofGreen roofUrban heat islandEnergy consumptionPeak demandOccupancyVentilation (architecture)Architectural engineeringThermal comfortEnvironmental engineeringElectricityCivil engineeringMeteorologyEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the demand for air conditioning systems has increased considerably. Consequentially, the energy demand for building cooling has become a serious concern. In particular, the energy peak demand that is intensified by the urban heat island (UHI) effect is often a critical issue for the outdated electricity infrastructure in many countries. In order to rationalize the building energy consumption while ensuring indoor thermal comfort, this paper explores the possibilities offered by the retrofitting of existing uninsulated roofs in combination with night natural cooling strategies. To this end, a case study was selected in order to investigate the performance of an extensive green roof (GR) with and without natural ventilation (NV). The selected building is located in Catania, southern Italy, in a very mild climate. Free-running conditions were evaluated together with air conditioning conditions during the daytime and free cooling via natural ventilation at night. The hourly variation of cooling loads during a typical hot day and the overall performance of the different investigated scenarios were compared. Finally, suggestions about the value of the different investigated building retrofitting strategies are reported.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations53
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban DevelopmentSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207