MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Energy Consumption, Pandemic Period and Online Academic Education: Case Studies in Romanian Universities

2021· article· en· W4200170420 on OpenAlexaff
Horia Andrei, Emil Diaconu, Gheorghe Andrei, Nicu Bizon, Alin Gheorghita Mazare, Laurenţiu Mihai Ionescu, Marilena Stănculescu, Radu Porumb, George Serițan, Paul Cristian Andrei, Marian Găiceanu, Sorin Deleanu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Quality and Harmonics
Canadian institutionsNorthern Alberta Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectricityConsumption (sociology)PandemicMains electricityEnergy consumptionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)BusinessEnvironmental economicsEngineeringEconomicsSociologyElectrical engineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectively, electricity is the most important current power source and, especially, of the future. Electricity consumption in universities worldwide is achieved by installations and equipment both in laboratories, classrooms, applications, and sports, in the rooms of administrative staff, and campus. Depending on the specializations, each university has a specific footprint of electricity consumption. During the pandemic of 2020, the world introduced several measures to limit the spread of the Covid virus, including online education in academia. Thus, in terms of electricity consumption, universities recorded a decrease during the pandemic, but there was an increase in household consumption for teachers and students. The subject of this paper is a quantitative analysis of the data provided by four universities in Romania on electricity consumption recorded before and during the pandemic. These data are correlated with household electricity consumption for the same two time periods, which were collected from some teachers and students in a university. A percentage of the decrease respectively increase of these electricity consumptions is due to the use of computers in the university respectively at home. That is why the measurements performed on a personal computer connected to the Teams platform used in the online education system are presented and analyzed. All these data and comparative analyses are especially useful for any university in the country or worldwide.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower Quality and HarmonicsFrench-language works237,207