MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225008509 · doi:10.18280/mmep.090208

Modeling the Thermal Regime of a Room in a Building with a Thermal Energy Storage Envelope

2022· article· en· W4225008509 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ruslan Kudabayev, Ulanbator Suleimenov, Raimberdi Ristavletov, Irkin Kasimov, Medetbek Kambarov, Nurlan Zhangabay, Khassen Abshenov

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Change Materials Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermal energy storageBuilding envelopeEnclosureThermalPhase-change materialEnvelope (radar)Thermal conductivityThermal energyThermal massMaterials scienceEnergy storageRenewable energyPhase changeEnergy (signal processing)Environmental scienceMechanical engineeringNuclear engineeringProcess engineeringMechanicsEngineeringComposite materialMeteorologyEngineering physicsThermodynamicsAerospace engineeringElectrical engineeringPhysicsPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An increasing demand for energy and climate change encouraged the search for new ways of using renewable energy sources, including in building structures. At present, improving energy efficiency in buildings by integrating thermal energy storage materials is an urgent task. This paper proposes a mathematical model for the thermal regime in a building with a TES building envelope. The enclosure model consists of gypsum board with 25% of phase change material (PCM). The PCM layers of different thickness reduce room temperature and heat load. The effectiveness evaluation of the proposed model involved calculating the thermal conductivity using the finite difference method. The results show that the incorporation of thermal energy storage materials can reduce temperature fluctuations in the room and maintain a comfortable temperature for a long time (up to 8 hours). With an increase in the thickness of the thermal energy storage layer, the cooling time of the exterior surface of the internal wall also increases.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations24
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Modelling and Engineering ProblemsSame topicPhase Change Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207