MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4250856172 · doi:10.1016/s1556-3499(12)00018-6

Instructions for Authors

2012· article· en· W4250856172 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chiropractic Humanities · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZero-energy buildingRenewable energyRetrofittingRoofEnergy modelingOffset (computer science)Zero emissionBuilding envelopePrimary energyCivil engineeringComputer scienceArchitectural engineeringEnvironmental scienceEfficient energy useEngineeringThermalMeteorologyElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to have an immediate impact on building energy-related emissions, existing buildings need to be addressed. To inform policy and technical decisions, detailed mathematical models are required which can explore numerous building retrofit solutions and their energy and emissions performance. This paper describes the adaptation of a hybrid statistical and engineering-based model for residential building stock in Canada to analyze community-scale energy retrofits. The modelling domain includes both envelope and mechanical retrofits, as well as district renewable energy systems. This model is then applied to a case study of converting a community of fifty 1980’s vintage single-detached homes to achieve net-zero energy. The case study demonstrated that deep envelope retrofits and fuel switching from natural gas to electric heat pump systems reduce community energy demand by 69%. Saturating available roof area with photovoltaics was able to achieve net-zero balance. By considering net-zero at the community-scale, individual buildings that did not achieve net-zero were offset by net-exporting neighbours. Annual community emissions of the retrofit reduced emissions by 95%. The analysis also highlights the significant impact on electrical infrastructure due to solar generation and energy demand mismatch.

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)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.8710.867

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.212 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chiropractic HumanitiesSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207