MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2532830792 · doi:10.4025/revtecnol.v25i1.28690

AVALIAÇÃO DE DIFERENTES ALTERNATIVAS DE MODELAGEM DE HABITAÇÕES DE INTERESSE SOCIAL NO PROGRAMA DE SIMULAÇÃO DE DESEMPENHO TÉRMICO ENERGYPLUS

2016· article· pt· W2532830792 on OpenAlexaff
Karin Maria Soares Chvatal, Tássia Helena Teixeira Marques

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Tecnológica · 2016
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutions123 Certification (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSimulaPhysicsComputer scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inúmeros países incorporam a simulação computacional em suas normas e regulamentos voltados ao desempenho térmico de edifícios. O modelo virtual criado nesses programas é uma representação de um edifício real, sujeito a simplificações e limitações específicas. O objetivo deste trabalho é avaliar diferentes alternativas de modelagem de habitações de interesse social no programa de simulação de desempenho térmico EnergyPlus. Para tal, foram simuladas duas habitações no clima de São Carlos, SP, Brasil, considerando variadas possibilidades para os seguintes aspectos: temperatura do solo, caixilhos, venezianas, beirais e dimensões das superfícies. Os dados foram analisados através do índice de conforto adaptativo prescrito pela norma internacional ASHRAE 55 (soma anual dos graus-hora de frio e de calor) e do método de avaliação do desempenho térmico proposto pela norma brasileira ABNT NBR 15575 (dias típicos de verão e inverno). Os resultados indicaram o impacto significativo da temperatura do solo, e em menor proporção, das venezianas e dos beirais. Dessa forma, é possível fornecer subsídios quantitativos para a tomada de decisões conscientes durante o processo de simulação.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.691
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.262 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista TecnológicaSame topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207