MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562591341

Net-Zero Energy Home Grows Up: Lessons and Puzzles from 10 Years of Data; Preprint

2016· article· en· W2562591341 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bethany Sparn, L. Earle, Craig Christensen, P.R. Norton

Bibliographic record

VenueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Renewable Energy Laboratory
KeywordsZero-energy buildingNet energyElectricityEnergy (signal processing)PreprintSingle-family detached homeQuarter (Canadian coin)Efficient energy useEnergy consumptionArchitectural engineeringEngineeringGeographyComputer scienceElectrical engineeringMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2005, Habitat for Humanity of Metro Denver, with support from NREL and other partners, built one of the first homes in the US to achieve net-zero energy based on monitored data. A family of three moved into the house when it was completed and lives there still. The home has been monitored continuously for the past ten years. Although PV production has remained steady, net energy performance has varied each year. The home was a net producer of energy annually in each of the first three years and in the ninth year, but not in years four through eight. Over the years, the PV system provided between 124% and 64% of the home source energy use. Electricity use in the home increased steadily during the first eight years, even though no significant new appliance was introduced into the house, such as a window air conditioner. Miscellaneous electric loads and space heating, both strongly dependent on occupant behavior, appear to be primarily responsible for the observed increase in energy use. An interesting aspect of this case study is how, even within a single family, natural changes in occupant lifestyles over time (e.g., kids growing up, schedules changing) can substantially impact the overall energy intensity of a home. Data from the last ten years will be explored for lessons learned that can improve the way we design low-load homes without sacrificing comfort or convenience for the occupants, and how we can make realistic predictions of long-term energy performance.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.011
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.005

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)Same topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207