MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006867560 · doi:10.1080/19401493.2020.1727954

Development of reference summer weather years for analysis of overheating risk in buildings

2020· article· en· W3006867560 on OpenAlexaffabout
Abdelaziz Laouadi, Abhishek Gaur, Michael Lacasse, Michal Bartko, M. M. Armstrong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Building Performance Simulation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverheating (electricity)Environmental scienceExtreme heatMeteorologyHeat stressClimatologyHeat loadClimate changeGeographyEngineeringAtmospheric sciences

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Overheating in buildings arising from climatic extreme heat events has been identified as a health concern to vulnerable occupants. However, there have been very limited studies to generate suitable weather data to evaluate by simulation the overheating risk and its effect on the comfort and health of occupants. This paper develops a methodology to identify reference summer weather years (RSWY) for overheating risk analysis. The methodology includes generation of historical climate data, and development of a heat stress metric for the definition and characterization of heat events. The Standard Effective Temperature was selected among a short list of popular metrics, modified and named t-SET to account for transient heat events, activity levels of occupants, and thermoregulatory controls of sleeping subjects. The t-SET model predictions compared well with measured body temperatures of subjects undergoing multi-stage activities under hot conditions. The t-SET index was used to generate RSWY for selected Canadian cities.

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)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations40
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Building Performance SimulationSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207