MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2986465390 · doi:10.1145/3360322.3360840

Development of a clustering-based morning start time estimation algorithm for space heating and cooling

2019· article· en· W2986465390 on OpenAlexaff
H. Burak Gunay, Zixiao Shi, Araz Ashouri, Guy R. Newsham

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMorningCluster analysisAlgorithmComputer sciencePoint (geometry)Bivariate analysisEnergy (signal processing)Cluster (spacecraft)Start pointData miningStatisticsMathematicsReal-time computingArtificial intelligenceMachine learningPhysicsEnd point

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The morning start time of heating and cooling equipment plays an important role in the energy and comfort performance of buildings. Existing algorithms to guide this decision require either many data types with a consistent labelling nomenclature or a detailed calibrated model. In this paper, a model-free clustering-based morning start time estimation algorithm is put forward. The algorithm inputs only four types of data: indoor and outdoor temperatures, and heating and cooling energy use, and does not require any information regarding the location of the temperature sensors. The algorithm consists of four steps. The first one employs clustering to form groups of zones with a similar temperature response. The second one searches for inflection points to identify cluster temperature change rates during morning start-up periods. The third one determines the start time based on previous morning start-up temperature change rates. The last one estimates the energy savings potential by using bivariate change point models. The algorithm was developed by using a dataset from a large office building. Through hierarchical clustering, the data from 142 temperature sensors were consolidated to only seven clusters. The median morning start-up temperature change rates in individual clusters were between 0.3°C/h and 0.8°C/h for heating, and between -0.5°C/h and -1.2°C/h for cooling. The savings potential by tuning daily start times based on this information was estimated as 3% and 7% for heating and cooling, 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207