MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295682146 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14654265.v2

Building Energy Surrogate Modelling – a Feature Selection Methodology

2022· preprint· en· W4295682146 on OpenAlexaff
Erica Catherine Barnes

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityToronto Metropolitan UniversitySciencetech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLasso (programming language)Feature selectionSelection (genetic algorithm)Computer scienceModel buildingBuilding modelSet (abstract data type)Surrogate modelEnergy (signal processing)Feature (linguistics)Building energy simulationRegression analysisData miningArtificial intelligenceMachine learningStatisticsEnergy performanceSimulationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A mathematical regression model, referred to as a surrogate model as it was trained on a set of computer-simulated results, was developed to permit the rapid modelling of large commercial office buildings within a single climate zone. The model was developed using a large number of building features and their EnergyPlus simulated results. In previous building energy surrogate modelling, a research gap in selecting building features using statistical approaches was identified. This thesis investigates a feature selection method, including forward stepwise selection and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), to identify building features that, together, have the most significant impact on annual building energy use. The final model, with 23 features selected through this methodology, predicts annual building energy use at 11.3% error, on average.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.260
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207