MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367844856 · doi:10.3390/buildings13051205

GIS for the Potential Application of Renewable Energy in Buildings towards Net Zero: A Perspective

2023· article· en· W4367844856 on OpenAlexaff
Yang Li, Haibo Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueBuildings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeospatial analysisZero-energy buildingRenewable energyEnergy engineeringGeographic information systemSustainabilityComputer scienceEnvironmental economicsEfficient energy useArchitectural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Environmental, economic, and social activities involve inherent spatial dimensions. The geospatial information system (GIS), a platform containing principles, methods, and tools to link, create, visualize, analyze, and model artificial activities and environment, provides the possibility to develop sustainability in the building sector. With globally political collaborations across governments, the demands to manage and visualize sustainable data (e.g., building energy and environment with geospatial reference) and implement more rigorous building modelling are increasing. A systematic mapping at multiple scales will help urban engineers, architectural engineers, policymakers, and energy planners identify emission hotspots, locate spatial resources, restructure district energy mix, and achieve net zero energy targets. To achieve net zero energy goals, it is crucial to minimize energy consumption, improve energy efficiency, and most importantly, apply renewable energy in buildings. However, these processes imply many aspects and challenges, regarding e.g., data availability, scalability, integrability, and a lack of clear and applicable frameworks. In this conceptional perspective paper, we aim to explore the potential of applying and installing renewable energy in net zero energy buildings using the GIS. More specifically, the described virtual framework will effectively support policy- and decision-makers in optimizing the energy structure, reducing building emissions, and applying renewable energy technologies. We also present challenges, limitations, and future directions for real practice.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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