MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307548691 · doi:10.3390/su142113885

Cooling Degree Days for Quick Energy Consumption Estimation in the GCC Countries

2022· article· en· W4307548691 on OpenAlexaff
Hayder Salem, Khalil Khanafer, Mohammad T. Alshammari, Ahmad R. Sedaghat, Salah Mahdi

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsCoquitlam College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeating degree dayCooling loadTariffDegree (music)Energy consumptionEstimationValue (mathematics)Environmental scienceConsumption (sociology)EngineeringAgricultural economicsGeographyBusinessEconomicsMathematicsStatisticsMechanical engineeringAir conditioningElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most useful and simplified approaches in assessing building energy estimates is the degree days method. The heating and cooling requirements can be easily compared for different locations as well as system trends. In this paper, the cooling degree day values for the capitals of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) are presented. Degree day values at different base temperatures are also produced for these locations. These values are useful for engineers and policy makers for evaluating energy demands and their cost for these countries. A typical two-story residential building is considered here and its yearly cooling load is evaluated. The total cooling energy is compared based on the energy cost of the respective GCC countries. The results presented in this investigation illustrated that the cooling load, based on the cooling degree days (CDDs) at a 23 °C base temperature, agrees well with the detailed hourly cooling load simulated by eQuest software. Additionally, the highest CDDs value of 2589 was observed in the city of Doha and the lowest value of 2037 was seen in Riyadh city. The lowest cooling cost of USD 492 corresponds to Muscat, while the highest value of USD 1672 belong to Abu Dubai, partially due to a higher tariff of 0.081 USD/kWh.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207