MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238692769 · doi:10.26868/25222708.2019.210704

Multi-Objective Optimisation of Passivhaus Buildings in a Social Housing Context

2020· article· en· W4238692769 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Forde, Christina J. Hopfe, Rob Mcleod, Ralph Evins

Bibliographic record

VenueBuilding Simulation Conference proceedings · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicArchitecture and Computational Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Architectural engineeringComputer sciencePublic housingEngineeringCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The housing crisis within the UK continues with growing private housing rental prices and increasing levels of homelessness. This situation has been driven by the homogeneous development of housing tenures under-supplying in-demand social and affordable homes. Previous work has seen the implementation of multi-objective optimisation within a broad range of building performance simulation software. The present work is novel in the implementation of a multi-objective decision support framework within software used for compliance with the low energy Passivhaus standard. This use of evidence-based decision support could enable local authorities to make better informed decision in relation to large development seeking Passivhaus compliance. Results indicate that different optimal solutions are present depending on the criteria used to meet the standard. This means that it is important to select early in the design process either the heating load, or annual heating demand criteria if optimisation techniques are to be applied based on the Passivhaus certification criteria to the design.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuilding Simulation Conference proceedingsSame topicArchitecture and Computational DesignFrench-language works237,207