In situ efficiency of filters in residential central HVAC systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-efficiency filtration in residential forced-air heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems protects equipment and can reduce exposure to particulate matter. Laboratory tests provide a measure of the nominal efficiency, but they may not accurately reflect the in situ efficiency of the filters because of variations in system conditions and changes in filter performance over time. The primary focus of this paper is to evaluate the effective filtration efficiency, which is inclusive of any loading and system impacts, in 21 occupied residential homes through in-duct concentration measurements. We considered the role of filter media by testing both electret and non-electret media, as well as the role of loading by considering new and used filters. The results show that filters with higher nominal efficiency generally had higher effective filtration efficiency in the same home. In terms of performance change, there is no significant difference in efficiency between initial and 3-month non-electret filters, but the efficiency of electret filters generally decreased over time. However, both nominal efficiency and performance change were vastly overshadowed by the wide variety in loading and system conditions across homes, making it hard to predict filter efficiency in a given home without in situ measurements.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".