Airtightness evaluation of Canadian dwellings and influencing factors based on measured data and predictive models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The airtightness of buildings has a significant impact on buildings' energy efficiency, maintenance and occupant comfort. The main goal of this study is to provide an evaluation of the air leakage characteristics of dwellings in different regions in Canada. This study evaluated the key influencing factors on airtightness performance based on a large set of measured data (73,450 dwellings located in Canada with 11 measurement parameters for each). Machine learning models based on multivariate regression (MVR) and Random Forest Ensemble (RFE) were developed to predict the air leakage value. The RFE model, which shows better results than MVR, was used to evaluate the effect of the ageing of buildings. Results showed that the maximum increase in air leakage occurs during the first year after construction - approximately 25%, and then 3.7% in the second year, after which the increase rate becomes insignificant and relatively constant - approximately 0.3% per year. The findings from this study can provide significant information for building designs, building performance simulations and strengthening standards and guidelines policies on indoor environmental quality.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".