MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770454202 · doi:10.1080/19401493.2017.1396359

Above-floor tube-and-plate radiant floor model development and validation

2017· article· en· W2770454202 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Building Performance Simulation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalCarleton UniversityNatural Resources Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTransient (computer programming)Finite element methodTube (container)Structural engineeringRadiant energyMechanical engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceOpticsRadiationPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While some building energy simulation tools include dedicated models to represent thermally massive embedded-tubes radiant floor systems, there are no models available for lightweight above-floor tube-and-plate (AFTP) systems. AFTP systems consist of a grooved wooden subfloor (or high density insulation layer), and conductive fin. This paper discusses the development of a transient AFTP radiant floor model and its implementation into ESP-r. This AFTP radiant floor model uses the general approach of the existing embedded-tube model in ESP-r and combines an analytical model of the tube with a two-dimensional finite difference model of the top layers of the floor construction. The new AFTP radiant floor model was found to compare closely with a transient two-dimensional finite element analysis model. Additionally, a full-scale transient experiment was conducted to empirically validate the model. The new model's predictions were found to be in close agreement with the measurements from this experiment.

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.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.225 · 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