MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216730849

Use of Stored Snow for Summer Cooling Loads

2021· article· en· W3216730849 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stuart J. Shelley

Bibliographic record

VenueStudent Research Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSmart Materials for Construction
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowEnvironmental scienceClimate changeGreenhouse gasFossil fuelMeteorologySnow removalElectricityGlobal warmingEngineeringWaste managementGeographyEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of the 21st century. One of its effects will be hotter summers and therefore an increased demand for indoor cooling systems. Unfortunately, these cooling systems can exacerbate climate change in two ways. The first is that these systems require a large amount of electricity to generate the cooling load; this electricity is currently made from fossil fuel burning power plants. The second, is they require potent greenhouse gases, in the form of refrigerants, to circulate within the system; these gases are often released into the atmosphere at the end of the system’s life. Alternative systems that are less energy intensive and make use of cleaner resources can help alleviate these issues. This research explores how stored snow can be used as a cooling source for buildings. A feasibility study was conducted for Edmonton to assess the viability of these snow cooling systems in Canada. Snowfall and weather statistics were gathered to find whether Edmonton has enough snow and the right weather conditions for the implementation of these cooling systems. One of the important findings was how previous research on the preservation of snow in alpine ski resorts could be applied to these systems, resulting in more efficient snow storage management. The implication from this research is that these cooling systems could reduce carbon emissions, and alleviate the challenges of climate change. Department: Engineering Faculty Mentor: Dr. Jeff Davis

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudent Research ProceedingsSame topicSmart Materials for ConstructionFrench-language works237,207