Evaluating Ventilation for Thermal Comfort in Two Classrooms Types in Malaysian Secondary Classrooms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed at evaluating the ventilation quality in two secondary school buildings in Malaysia with two different layouts, representing one single-and one double-loaded-corridor design model.One classroom was chosen from each school for the study.In this study, the method uses computer simulations and user surveys to compare results on designing future secondary schools in Malaysia.DesignBuilder software were used to simulate the exterior and interior airflow, temperature, and humidity for various times of the year, with data collected from the simulations were fed into and analyses through the online CBE Thermal Comfort Tool to determine thermal comfort performance by using adaptive approach method.The simulations were performed for the same locations, on the same dates, and under the same environmental conditions to obtain comparable results.The simulation data were used to split the classrooms into thermal zones, with the thermal comfort rate for each zone being determined on the specified dates.A user survey to determine satisfaction levels and obtain comments was conducted with 67 participants (all students plus three teachers from each classroom).It was found that the single-loaded-corridor system provided greater thermal comfort throughout the year due to reduced temperatures and enhanced airflow.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".