A review of ontologies for smart and continuous commissioning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Smart and continuous commissioning (SCCx) of buildings can result in a significant reduction in the gap between design and operational performance. Ontologies play an important role in SCCx as they facilitate data readability and reasoning by machines. A better understanding of ontologies is required in order to develop and incorporate them in SCCx. This paper critically reviews the state-of-the-art research on building data ontologies since 2014 within the SCCx domain through sorting them based on building data types, general approaches, and applications. The data types of two main domains of building information modeling and building management system have been considered in the majority of existing ontologies. Three main applications are evident from a critical analysis of existing ontologies: (1) key performance indicator calculation, (2) building performance improvement, and (3) fault detection and diagnosis. The key gaps found in the literature review are a holistic ontology for SCCx and insight on how such approaches should be evaluated. Based on these findings, this study provides recommendations for future necessary research including: identification of SCCx-related data types, assessment of ontology performance, and creation of open-source approaches.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".