MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396697506 · doi:10.1051/e3sconf/202452305002

Mixed-use neighbourhood to maximise urban energy community potential

2024· article· en· W4396697506 on OpenAlexaff
Francesca Vecchi, Umberto Berardi

Bibliographic record

VenueE3S Web of Conferences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeighbourhood (mathematics)GeographyEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceEconomic geographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Renewable energy communities (REC) are key drivers in promoting energy transition to renewable energy sources (RES). To maximise local potential for RECs, matching demand and local production requires the integration of different load profiles. Residential users prevail in urban areas while planning mixed-use neighbourhoods would contribute to having complementary loads towards urban RECs. Mixed areas can optimise the use of renewable production at different hours and limit demand pressures on the network. However, detailed spatial analyses are required to cluster building functions for long-term benefits. This work investigates which mix of building functions in urban blocks can maximise energy self-consumption and self-sufficiency. Five blocks combining residential with productive and tertiary activities are chosen, from a completely residential to a heterogeneous mix. The single loads use representative buildings for the Italian context. The integration of building functions flattens the energy peak loads in the district while increasing the use of PV production. The study identifies the residential and non-residential ratios to maximise energy selfconsumption and self-sufficiency. Domestic users would mainly exploit the production from nearby non-domestic buildings, but adequate exchange mechanisms and upgrade of infrastructure still need to be implemented.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.739

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE3S Web of ConferencesSame topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207