MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255766709 · doi:10.26868/25222708.2019.211339

Ultra-Low Carbon Technologies for Building Retrofits

2020· article· en· W4255766709 on OpenAlexaffabout
Samantha Alyce Lane, Randy J. Irwin, Andrea Frisque, Jeanie Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueBuilding Simulation Conference proceedings · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon fibersComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reaching the goal of net-zero carbon consumption is particularly challenging for existing buildings. Calibrated energy simulations, using IES VE and EnergyPlus, of a portfolio of ten existing commercial buildings in Canada were used to develop paths to net zero carbon. Emerging technologies including carbon sequestration, algae farming, electrochromic glass, predictive controls, building integrated photovoltaic, and fuel cell technologies were evaluated for their applicability in today’s built environment. This paper provides recommendations and commentary on the available information, relative impact and economic feasibility of innovative and new but proven technologies for evaluation in existing building retrofit simulations. This research paper is highly relevant to building owners, and simulation specialists given that in 2030, 75% of our building stock will consist of buildings in existence today (ECCC, 2016), while net zero carbon strategies typically focus on new construction methodologies. Expertise in recommending and analysing improvement measures for existing buildings represents an exciting and growing opportunity for building simulation specialists. This paper provides detailed and tested recommendations on the relative utility of emerging technologies for achieving net-zero carbon and provides comment on the relative percentage of retrofit budget that was diverted to innovative and emerging technologies to simulate maximum potential site carbon reduction.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 topicEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207