The Development of Health-Based Overheating Limit Criteria for School Buildings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Overheating in school buildings can negatively affect the cognitive learning performance of particularly young students whose thermoregulation systems are still developing. However, currently, in schools, issues related to overheating have been addressed by limiting the exposure time to thermal discomfort. In this paper, the development of a general procedure that combines building and bioheat simulations to evaluate overheating risk in schools and generate health-based overheating limit criteria that may be applied in Canadian schools is described. General school building models, having either old or new constructions, were created based on a primary school building and successfully calibrated using field measurements of indoor temperature and humidity and published building energy use intensity data. Three sets of two limit criteria (exposure duration and severity of overheating) that account for the personal exposure conditions of students in primary, middle, and secondary schools were developed by limiting the body dehydration of students during extreme overheating events. Comparing the proposed limit criteria with the hour of exceedance criterion revealed interesting relationships between them, suggesting the proposed limit criteria as a benchmark for the comfort-based criteria, particularly for the more vulnerable primary and middle schools. The proposed procedure with the obtained overheating limit criteria is intended to be applied in any field or simulation study to assess the risk of overheating in similar school buildings under any local prevailing climate.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".