MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386879485 · doi:10.3390/su151813983

Energy Audits and Energy Modeling as a Tool towards Reducing Energy Consumption in Buildings: The Cases of Two Multi-Unit Residential Buildings (MURBs) in Toronto

2023· article· en· W4386879485 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ali Taileb, Mohammed Sherzad

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsDurham College
FundersAjman University
KeywordsGlazingEnergy consumptionEnvironmental scienceBuilding envelopeEfficient energy useEnergy (signal processing)Consumption (sociology)AuditEnergy conservationElectricityGas consumptionEnvelope (radar)Building energy simulationAutomotive engineeringEngineeringEnergy performanceCivil engineeringMeteorologyProcess engineeringTelecommunicationsBusinessElectrical engineeringAccountingStatisticsGeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research is based on an energy audit of two multi-unit residential buildings (MURBs) located in Toronto, Canada. Energy consumption (gas and electricity) data were extracted from the energy bills of the two buildings for a consecutive period of three years. The data were then normalized to account for variations in weather conditions. Conclusions were drawn from correlation analyses between kWh, cooling degree days (CDDs), and heating degree days (HDDs), which were then compared to the energy consumption benchmarks of MURBs within the GTA. An energy simulation using e-Quest v.3.64 was performed, utilizing the advantages of the e-Quest building modeling tool to create a virtual 3D model of the audited buildings. A baseline model was constructed to reflect the actual buildings and was used to simulate the outcomes and calculate the projected energy savings from window replacements with a higher energy efficiency than the existing ones. The simulation results revealed that triple low-E glazing outperformed single- and double-glass windows, achieving reductions of 38% and 34% in gas consumption, respectively. The building envelope simulations showed that enhancing insulation reduced gas consumption by 4%, while an insulation upgrade demonstrated no discernible savings. Reducing the window area by 20% (north/south sides) led to a 6% decrease in gas consumption, while a 30% reduction resulted in approximately 9% of energy savings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score0.595

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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