Evaluating the Potential to Achieve Passive House with Structural Insulated Panels using a Case Study in Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A home in Toronto recently re-constructed with Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) was analyzed and an energy simulation using HOT2000 and PHPP was created based on the current state of the house. The simulations were used to determine compliance with the Canadian R-2000 standard and the Passive House standard. The building met the R-2000 standard in its current state. Further analysis was required in order to determine design changes that may be made to achieve Passive House. This research determined the applicability of SIPs to achieve these standards in the context of the subject home. Through the redesign of the building enclosure assemblies and the elimination of the thermal bridges through the envelope, the Passive House standard was achieved using a double wall stud SIP. A number of design changes were also required including better performing windows and HRV as well as the addition of glazing to the south façade and removal of glazing on other facades. These design changes were then applied to HOT2000 and it was found that the Passive House building achieved an energy savings of 60% compared to the R-2000 standard baseline.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".