MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Understanding the role of moisture recovery in indoor humidity: An analytical study for a Norwegian single-family house during heating season

2022· article· en· W4313420456 on OpenAlexaff
Peng Liu, María Justo Alonso, Hans Martin Mathisen, Anneli Halfvardsson, Carey J. Simonson

Bibliographic record

VenueBuilding and Environment · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumidityMoistureEnvironmental scienceBedroomIndoor air qualityEnergy recovery ventilationVentilation (architecture)Relative humidityThermal comfortEnvironmental engineeringMeteorologyAir conditioningCivil engineeringEngineeringGeographyHVAC

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Providing a high-quality indoor environment with appropriate indoor humidity levels for residential buildings is essential for good physical and mental health, occupant comfort, and long-term building performance. The role of moisture recovery in indoor humidity levels in cold climates has long been the subject of controversy; scholars have debated whether it ameliorates the problem of "too dry" air or causes a new problem of "too humid" air. The current study examines a method using moisture balance equations integrated with moisture recovery to analyse moisture recovery's effect in cold climates. A virtual single-family house in Oslo, Norway, was used to demonstrate the impact of moisture recovery on humidity levels in the kitchen, bathroom, bedroom and living room. The results show that moisture recovery has varying influences on indoor humidity depending on the intensity of moisture recovery, moisture production and ventilation. The indoor moisture production and humidity levels were validated against large-scale field measurements in residential buildings. For the virtual single-family house, the optimal moisture recovery effectiveness is about 50–60% with a 2-min interval, as the "too dry" air (RH<20%) issue is eliminated while the risk of "too humid" air (RH>80%) is not exacerbated. This work also identifies the possibility of controlling or optimising indoor humidity by altering the energy recovery system's moisture recovery effectiveness. Furthermore, the study's findings can be used to optimise thermal comfort or assess epidemiological risk in terms of the impact of indoor humidity.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuilding and EnvironmentSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207