MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233977927 · doi:10.26868/25222708.2019.210588

Developing Equivalent Surface Heat Transfer Input Parameters for Updated Standard 140/BESTEST Thermal Fabric Test Cases

2020· article· en· W4233977927 on OpenAlexaff
J. Neymark, Michaël Kummert, R. Judkoff

Bibliographic record

VenueBuilding Simulation Conference proceedings · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Behavior of Composites
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsHeat transferThermalMaterials scienceSurface (topology)MechanicsComputer scienceMechanical engineeringComposite materialThermodynamicsEngineeringPhysicsGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140, Standard Method of Test for the Evaluation of Building Energy Analysis Computer Programs, is widely cited for evaluating software for use with performance-path energy efficiency analysis in conjunction with well-known energy-efficiency standards, including: ASHRAE Standard 90.1, the International Energy Conservation Code, and other international standards. This paper summarizes recent work to develop improved equivalent surface heat transfer input parameters for the building thermal fabric comparative test cases that comprise a portion of Standard 140. The software-to-software comparative test method allows comparison of simulation results from a wide variety of building energy simulation programs to each other. In this type of test method, it is of great importance to specify inputs that are as well-equivalenced as possible to accommodate a wide variety of input schemes for the tested programs, and thereby reduce the potential for disagreements among them in the tests. Results include new alternative constant surface coefficients that are appropriate to the test cases and demonstrate their ability to approximate the more detailed surface heat transfer models from which they are derived.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuilding Simulation Conference proceedingsSame topicMechanical Behavior of CompositesFrench-language works237,207