Performance evaluation of Active Chilled Beam under cooling operation in real office conditions in a high-performance building
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study investigates the operation of Active Chilled Beam under cooling operation in single occupant office in a high-performance LEED Gold Building at the British Columbia Institute of Technology in Vancouver. The thermo-fluid phenomena of room air were studied inside a few offices under cooling operation in stable room temperature conditions. Active Chilled Beams were found performing effectively in cooling mode operation. Surface temperature distribution and the air temperature distribution in the occupied zone were found uniform at all heights and close to the room setpoint. The air velocities were within the recommended air velocity set by ASHRAE Standard for thermal comfort except at the colliding jet between two beams in some offices. The operative temperature measured near the occupant was found close to the room setpoint. The supply air velocity and supply air temperature at both the slots of the beam were found different. It was concluded that the difference in supply air velocity could be due to the uneven pressure distribution in the primary air plenum owing to the connection method of the duct to the primary plenum and the difference in temperature could be due to the circuit arrangement of heat exchanger inside the Active Chilled Beam, which needs further research and investigation of the beam characteristics in a controlled environment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".