MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205501877 · doi:10.3390/app12020888

Multi-Objective Optimization of Hybrid Renewable Tri-Generation System Performance for Buildings

2022· article· en· W4205501877 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Energy Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTRNSYSRenewable energyHVACHybrid systemHeat pumpPhotovoltaic systemHeat exchangerEnvironmental scienceAutomotive engineeringProcess engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceThermalAir conditioningMechanical engineeringMeteorologyElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hybrid renewable energy systems are subject to extensive research around the world and different designs have found their way to the market and have been commercialized. These systems usually employ multiple components, both renewable and conventional, combined in a way to increase the system’s overall efficiency and resilience and to lower GHG emissions. In this paper, a hybrid renewable energy system was designed for residential use and its annual energy performance was investigated and optimized. The multi-module hybrid system consists of a Ground-Air Heat Exchanger (GAHX), Photovoltaic Thermal (PVT) panels and Air to Water Heat Pump (AWHP). The developed system’s annual performance was simulated in the TRaNsient SYStem (TRNSYS) environment and optimized using the General Algebraic Modelling System (GAMS) platform. Multi-objective non-linear optimization algorithms were developed and applied to define optimal system design and performance parameters while reducing cost and GHG emissions. The results revealed that the designed system was able to satisfy building thermal heating/cooling loads throughout the year. The ground source heat exchanger contributed 21.3% and 26.3% of the energy during heating and cooling seasons, respectively. The initial design was optimized in terms of key performance parameters and module sizes. The annual simulation analysis showed that the system was able to self-generate and meet nearly 29.4% of the total HVAC electricity needs, with the rest being supplied by the grid. The annual system module performance efficiencies were 13.4% for the PVT electric and 5.5% for the PVT thermal, with an AWHP COP of 4.0.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.192 · 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