Developing Equivalent Surface Heat Transfer Input Parameters for Updated Standard 140/BESTEST Thermal Fabric Test Cases
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it