Training commercial energy users in behavior change: A case study. ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Training commercial energy users in behavior change: A case study Sea Rotmann and Beth Karlin, See Change Institute ABSTRACT Within the commercial sector, energy managers and building operators have a large impact over their organizations’ energy use. However, they mostly focus on technology solutions and retrofits, rather than human or corporate behaviors, and how to change them. This gap in targeted commercial sector research and behavioral interventions provides a great opportunity which is currently not being addressed. This paper presents a field research pilot where an empirical behavior change research process was applied and taught to commercial energy users in Ontario, Canada. This course served to fill an identified market gap and to improve commercial energy managers’ literacy in behavioral science theory and techniques. A needs assessment identified a clear gap in behavioral training for energy managers, and high interest in the course further proved out the market opportunity for professional training on how to design, implement and evaluate behavior change interventions. Evaluation results identified positive feedback in terms of course reaction, self-reported learning and behavioral outcomes, and tangible results when course participants returned to work to apply their learnings. Evaluation results suggest that such training fills a vital gap in the current Strategic Energy Management (SEM) landscape, and could unlock significant savings in the commercial energy sector.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".