Thermodynamic analysis of a hybrid energy system using geothermal and solar energy sources with thermal storage in a residential building
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Residential buildings in Canada require remarkable heating loads in the winter. Many homeowners potentially consider more cost effective and environmentally‐benign solutions, including solar energy systems, in order to replace fossil fuels. However, this might not be efficient because many cities are exposed to minimum solar radiation resulting in large surface area of solar panels. Therefore, a hybrid energy system is designed to combine five photovoltaic thermal solar panels, a 300‐m geothermal loop, and 9463.53‐kg water of phase change material thermal battery storage for a residential building of 325 m 2 total floor space in the city of Oshawa, Canada. The building has maximum heating and cooling loads of 13.8 and 8.7 kW, respectively. A thermodynamic analysis is applied to the system in January and the whole year. It was found that the solar panels can supply thermal energy and electrical power of 8 and 50 W, respectively, in January, while the geothermal and thermal storage energy can provide 16.8 and 9 kW over the year, respectively. The hybrid system requires an additional heating load of 1.85 kW from the furnace. The overall energetic and exergetic coefficient of performance of the system are estimated to be 54.58% and 3.34% in the winter and 42.6% and 4.47% in the summer, respectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it