MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392628910 · doi:10.26868/25222708.2023.1404

A framework for the design of representative neighborhoods for energy flexibility assessment in CityLearn

2023· article· en· W4392628910 on OpenAlexaff
Kingsley Nweye, Kathryn Kaspar, Giacomo Buscemi, Giuseppe Pinto, Han Li, Tianzhen Hong, Mohamed Ouf, Alfonso Capozzoli

Bibliographic record

VenueBuilding Simulation Conference proceedings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmarkingFlexibility (engineering)Computer scienceElectrificationGridRenewable energyElectricityDemand responseResource (disambiguation)Distributed generationDistributed computingEnvironmental economicsEngineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electricity grid in the U.S. continues to undergo system-wide changes due to electrification of end-uses, as well as the adoption of intermittent on-site renewable energy systems. When effectively managed, distributed energy resource in buildings can provide energy flexibility to alleviate grid loads at critical periods. However, it is important to understand the role of geographic, climatic and occupant behavioral differences on the effectiveness of their flexibility. Thus, we provide a framework that uses an open-source U.S. building-stock database with clustering techniques to design representative neighborhoods for distributed energy resource control algorithm benchmarking. We demonstrate an application in three neighborhoods that use reinforcement learning control for energy storage system management and simulation results show up to 42% reduction in peak demand, amongst other key performance indicators.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuilding Simulation Conference proceedingsSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207