Bayesian Calibrating Educational Building Thermal Models to Hourly Indoor Air Temperature: Methodology and Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract With the increase in the frequency and duration of heatwaves and extreme temperatures, global warming becomes one of the most critical environmental issues. Heatwaves pose significant threats to human health, including related diseases and deaths, especially for vulnerable groups. Such as the one during the 2018 summer in Montreal, Canada, caused up to 53 deaths, with most lived in buildings without access to air-conditioning. Unlike building energy models that mainly focus on energy performance, building thermal models emphasizes indoor thermal performance without a mechanical system. It is required an understanding of the complex dynamic building thermal physics in which detailed building parameters need to be specified but challenging to be determined in real life. The uncertainty assessment of the parameters estimates can make the results more reliable. Therefore, in this paper, a Bayesian-based calibration procedure was presented and applied to an educational building. First, the building was modeled in EnergyPlus based on an in-site visit and related information collection. Second, a sensitivity analysis was performed to identify significant parameters affecting the errors between simulated and monitored indoor air temperatures. Then, a Meta-model was developed and used during the calibration process instead of the original EnergyPlus model to decrease the requirement of computing load and time. Subsequently, the Bayesian inference theory was employed to calibrate the model on hourly indoor air temperatures in summer. Finally, the model was validated. It is shown that the Bayesian calibration procedure not only can calibrate the model within the performance tolerance required by international building standards/codes but also predict future thermal performance with a confidence interval, which makes it more reliable.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".