A critical appraisal of the added value of BiPV in atria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Building integration of photovoltaics (PV) has long been acknowledged as a key application for PV in developed countries. The avoided use of comparably priced alternatives such as polished stone in commercial facades enables PV to be applied often at no additional cost. The use of semi-transparent PV modules within commercial atria represents an interesting application in this respect. However, compared to standard double glazing an element incorporating mono-crystalline PV cells in a glass-glass construction comes at a cost premium. To justify such an application there must be significant added value in the PV solution. This paper critically appraises a semi-transparent PV atrium which has been used to link two buildings at Southampton University. The PV atrium encloses the main campus reception desk and performs multiple functions, which have direct and indirect benefits for the building users and the wider University: electricity generation, solar protection, environmental and technology statements for the building and the University, enhanced comfort and prestige of the office workspace. A comparison of alternative shading solutions for the atrium combined with evaluation of user’s perception of the building / atrium and its impact on their personal workspace has been undertaken. It is shown that PV in commercial atria does not always have to be considered as a ‘luxury’ option and with appropriate consideration of these added value factors, its selection justified.
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 | 0.024 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".