MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Demographics as Determinants of Building Occupants’ Indoor Environmental Perceptions: Insights from a Machine Learning Incremental Modeling and Analysis Approach

2022· article· en· W4225326738 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

VenueJournal of Computing in Civil Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandom forestPredictive modellingPerceptionDemographicsComputer scienceMachine learningBuilt environmentEngineeringPsychologyCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relationship between the demographical characteristics of building occupants and their perception of indoor comfort is increasingly being studied. However, the added value from accounting for such characteristics when modeling and predicting occupants’ perceptions remains unclear. An incremental machine learning (ML) modeling and analysis approach is proposed to quantify the influence of four demographical factors (gender, age, nationality, and time lived in the environment) on occupants’ perceptions of their indoor environment conditions. A three-step methodology is presented: (1) data collection through sensors and a questionnaire administered on 206 occupants of academic and office buildings in Abu Dhabi, UAE, (2) development of ML models (i.e., support vector machine, random forest, and gradient boosting) to predict occupants’ perceptions under different scenarios of demographical representation (i.e., from no representation to all demographical parameters included), and (3) analysis of the impact of demographical parameters’ inclusion on the performance of the ML models in terms of predictive accuracy, F1-scores, and computing time. Results confirm that including demographical variables could increase prediction accuracy and F1-scores by approximately 19% and 56%, respectively. However, in some instances, the inclusion of these variables reduced model performance while increasing computing time by as much as 50%. A detailed discussion is presented on the comparative performance of the different tested ML algorithms and the need to strike a balance between increasing model complexity and computational costs.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.745

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.189 · 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