MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392628999 · doi:10.26868/25222708.2023.1398

Predicting energy consumption and thermal comfort in buildings using a hybrid machine learning and building performance simulation approach

2023· article· en· W4392628999 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBuilding Simulation Conference proceedings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoosting (machine learning)Gradient boostingComputer scienceThermal comfortMachine learningEnergy consumptionPredictive powerArtificial intelligencePredictive modellingRegression analysisSupport vector machineEfficient energy useRegressionPower consumptionPower (physics)EngineeringRandom forestMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper develops machine learning surrogate models to emulate a Building Performance Simulation (BPS) model of an office building at low computational costs. Unlike most previous studies, the surrogate models include design and operational parameters as independent variables, and thermal comfort metrics as dependent variables. The findings indicate that regression-based models achieved high accuracy levels (R2>0.99) when predicting energy-related metrics, while Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) outperformed them when predicting thermal comfort metrics. Light Gradient Boosting (LightGBM) also showed competitive predictive results at relatively low computational costs, highlighting the need to further explore algorithms that balance predictive power and model complexity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.225 · 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