MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4234932386 · doi:10.26868/25222708.2019.210714

Towards Development and Validation of a Simplified Infiltration Model for Commercial Buildings

2020· article· en· W4234932386 on OpenAlexafffund
Adam Wills, Justin Berquist, Iain Macdonald

Bibliographic record

VenueBuilding Simulation Conference proceedings · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsInfiltration (HVAC)Computer scienceDevelopment (topology)Model validationSystems engineeringEngineeringData scienceMeteorologyMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As building envelopes continue to become more thermally insulated, the impact of exfiltration/infiltration on space heating demand will become increasingly significant. Heat transfer through opaque and transparent envelope components is well-understood and characterized in building performance simulation (BPS); however, simple constant flow assumptions are often used for modelling air infiltration which can result in substantial inaccuracies in estimated performance. A detailed building thermal and air flow network model was developed as a case study to examine the sensitivity of envelope leakage site distribution to annual space heating energy. Additionally the model was used to determine if this sensitivity diminishes as a building is pressurized. Results of the case study indicate that distribution of leakage area varies annual energy estimates and average infiltration by ±3% and ±10%, respectively, when unpressurized. Pressurization was found to significantly increase sensitivity of annual space heating demand to leakage distribution.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuilding Simulation Conference proceedingsSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207