Prediction of Thermal Energy Demand Using Fuzzy-Based Models Synthesized with Metaheuristic Algorithms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasing consumption of energy calls for proper approximation of demand towards a sustainable and cost-effective development. In this work, novel hybrid methodologies aim to predict the annual thermal energy demand (ATED) by analyzing the characteristics of the building, such as transmission coefficients of the elements, glazing, and air-change conditions. For this objective, an adaptive neuro-fuzzy-inference system (ANFIS) was optimized with equilibrium optimization (EO) and Harris hawks optimization (HHO) to provide a globally optimum training. Moreover, these algorithms were compared to two benchmark techniques, namely grey wolf optimizer (GWO) and slap swarm algorithm (SSA). The performance of the designed hybrids was evaluated using different accuracy indicators, and based on the results, ANFIS-EO and ANFIS-HHO (with respective RMSEs equal to 6.43 and 6.90 kWh·m−2·year−1 versus 9.01 kWh·m−2·year−1 for ANFIS-GWO and 11.80 kWh·m−2·year−1 for ANFIS-SSA) presented the most accurate analysis of the ATED. Hence, these models are recommended for practical usages, i.e., the early estimations of ATED, leading to a more efficient design of buildings.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".