Knowledge Discovery by Analyzing the State of the Art of Data-Driven Fault Detection and Diagnostics of Building HVAC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The automated fault detection and diagnostics (AFDD) of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) using data mining and machine learning models have recently received substantial attention from researchers and practitioners. Various models have been developed over the years for AFDD of complete HVAC or its sub-systems. However, HVAC complexities, which partly have roots in its close coupling nature and interrelated dependencies, mean that understanding the relationship between faults and the suitability of the techniques remains an unanswered question. The literature analysis and interactive visualization of the data collected from the past implementation of AFDD models can provide useful insight to further explore this question by applying artificial intelligence (AI). Association rule mining (ARM) is deployed by this paper, using the frequent pattern (FP) growth algorithm to generate frequent fault sets for most common HVAC faults from the body of AFDD models developed in the literature to represent the status quo. A new model is developed for common HVAC faults and the techniques most frequently used to detect and diagnose them. A recommender system is developed using the ARM model to extract knowledge from the body of knowledge of HVAC data-driven AFDD in the form of rule-sets that reflect the associations. Findings of this review paper can significantly help civil and building engineers, as well as facility managers, in better management of building HVAC systems.
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 | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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".