Development and performance assessment of a new opensource Bayesian inference R platform for building energy model calibration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many factors contribute to the inherent uncertainty of energy consumption modeling in buildings. It is essential to perform a calibration and sensitivity analysis in order to manage these uncertainties. Despite the availability of several calibration methods, they are often deterministic and lack quantified uncertainties. Moreover, the selection of parameters in building energy modeling for calibration depends on the user's experience. Therefore, a more rigorous selection process is required. This study developed a new automated Bayesian Inference calibration platform running as an R package. A sensitivity analysis module and a Bayesian inference module determine the calibration parameters and uncertainties, respectively. The Meta-model module is developed to replace the building energy model for the Markov Chain Monte Carlo process to save computing time. The proposed platform is successfully demonstrated on a synthetic high-rise office building and a real high-rise residential building in a hot and arid climate. The relationship between the number of calibration parameters, calibration performance, and the accuracy of the Meta-model is further discussed. The developed calibration platform in this study proved to have clear advantages over the existing platforms, with the ability to reasonably estimate building energy performance in a short computing time.
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 | 0.007 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.008 |
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".