MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391560351 · doi:10.1080/23744731.2024.2304539

Energy consumption disaggregation in commercial buildings: a time series decomposition approach

2024· article· en· W4391560351 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Narges Zaeri Esfahani, Araz Ashouri, H. Burak Gunay, Farid Bahiraei

Bibliographic record

VenueScience and Technology for the Built Environment · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityNational Research Council Canada
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsEnergy consumptionEnergy flowComputer scienceEfficient energy useEnergy (signal processing)Energy accountingAuditReliability engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineeringAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As commonly stated, we cannot manage what we do not measure. Understanding the flow of energy and its end-uses within a building is critical for energy management. Therefore, the lack of high resolution energy submetering is a significant barrier to efficient energy management in buildings. Despite this, many buildings still lack adequate submetering for their major end-uses because of the cost and practical restrictions. Energy disaggregation techniques aim at breaking down the bulk meter energy data into primary end-uses to gain insight into consumption patterns. However, high resolution, trustworthy BAS trend data is essential to develop reliable disaggregation techniques and capture unmeasured energy flow accurately. This paper explores a time series decomposition based method to disaggregate the total energy use into three major end uses namely lighting and plug loads, cooling, and heating energy use without BAS trend data. The results were compared with actual submetered data from ten office buildings in Ottawa, Canada for validation purposes. Specific insights into lighting and thermal scheduling, as well as hourly, daily, and monthly operational variations based on the de-composition components were discussed. The promising performance of the proposed method suggests that it could be used for quick and low cost auditing of commercial buildings with access to only the building’s total energy use data.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience and Technology for the Built EnvironmentSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207