Performance of a CO<sub>2</sub>-based demand controlled dual core energy recovery ventilation system for northern housing experiencing varying occupancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indoor air quality and health are major areas of concern in northern and remote communities where homes experience varying occupancy, often overcrowding and are influenced by ventilation. Heat/energy recovery ventilators installed in the north are selected to provide required minimum ventilation rate set by ventilation standards (ASHRAE 62.2, etc.). Northern overcrowded homes become under-ventilated, leading to deteriorated IAQ, mold and health-related problems. This paper present results from a side-by-side testing of a CO 2 -based demand-controlled ERV versus a constant air flows ERV, using twin houses with simulated occupancies. The control strategy was based on the difference in CO 2 -concentration between exhaust/return air from the house and outdoor air. The implemented strategy based on a CO 2 sensor network connected with an ERV continuously exhausting stale air from kitchen and bathrooms was simple and efficient in adjusting ventilation rate based on occupancy rate. The CO 2 -based demand-controlled ERV provided a much better control of indoor CO 2 concentrations in the main floor and master bedroom, and with lower CO 2 concentrations in bedrooms during night time, compared to the reference house with concentrations exceeding 2000 ppm. However, the CO 2 -based demand-controlled ERV had higher power consumption than conventional ERV with constant air flows.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".