MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000718355 · doi:10.3390/su12020473

Window Design of Naturally Ventilated Offices in the Mediterranean Climate in Terms of CO2 and Thermal Comfort Performance

2020· article· en· W3000718355 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hardi K. Abdullah, Halil Zafer Alibaba

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWindow (computing)Thermal comfortNatural ventilationEnvironmental scienceVentilation (architecture)Mediterranean climateQuarter (Canadian coin)Architectural engineeringIndoor air qualityMeteorologyThermalCold climateComputer scienceEngineeringEnvironmental engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural ventilation through window openings is an inexpensive and effective solution to bring fresh air into internal spaces and improve indoor environmental conditions. This study attempts to address the “indoor air quality–thermal comfort” dilemma of naturally ventilated office buildings in the Mediterranean climate through the effective use of early window design. An experimental method of computational modelling and simulation was applied. The assessments of indoor carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration and adaptive thermal comfort were performed using the British/European standard BS EN 15251:2007. The results indicate that when windows were opened, the first-floor zones were subjected to the highest CO2 levels, especially the north-facing window in the winter and the south-facing window in the summer. For a fully glazed wall, a 10% window opening could provide all the office hours inside category I of CO2 concentration. Such an achievement requires full and quarter window openings in the cases of 10% and 25% window-to-floor ratios (WFR), respectively. The findings of the European adaptive comfort showed that less than 50% of office hours appeared in category III with cross-ventilation. The concluding remarks and recommendations are presented.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations33
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207