From White to Black-Box Models: A Review of Simulation Tools for Building Energy Management and Their Application in Consulting Practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Buildings consume significant energy worldwide and account for a substantial proportion of greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, building energy management has become critical with the increasing demand for sustainable buildings and energy-efficient systems. Simulation tools have become crucial in assessing the effectiveness of buildings and their energy systems, and they are widely used in building energy management. These simulation tools can be categorized into white-box and black-box models based on the level of detail and transparency of the model’s inputs and outputs. This review publication comprehensively analyzes the white-box, black-box, and web tool models for building energy simulation tools. We also examine the different simulation scales, ranging from single-family homes to districts and cities, and the various modelling approaches, such as steady-state, quasi-steady-state, and dynamic. This review aims to pinpoint the advantages and drawbacks of various simulation tools, offering guidance for upcoming research in the field of building energy management. We aim to help researchers, building designers, and engineers better understand the available simulation tools and make informed decisions when selecting and using them.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".