ENABLING INTEROPERABILITY OF URBAN BUILDING ENERGY DATA BASED ON OGC API STANDARDS AND CITYGML 3D CITY MODELS
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. This paper presents an investigation into the interoperability of 3D building energy data management, delivery, processing, and visualization via web clients using Open Geospatial Consortium – Application Programming Interface (OGC API) standard-based data models and web interfaces. Specifically, the OGC API – 3D GeoVolumes enable access to 3D city model geometries and semantics on the web, the OGC API – Features support the 2D version of the same geospatial data, the OGC API – Processes are used for CityGML analytics and building energy computation with the SimStadt urban simulation software and the OGC SensorThings API is utilized to manage related spatiotemporal or time-series datasets. The efficacy of this approach has been demonstrated in the OGC Testbed 18 Innovation Program, which highlighted the capacity of OGC API web services to synchronize building energy data and computation results between client and server for the case study of Helsinki, Finland, and Montreal, Canada. The advantages of using OGC API services for 3D building energy data interoperability are discussed, and it is suggested that the use of OGC API be promoted to the general public as well as extended to other domains and on a larger scale in future research.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it