MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396813774 · doi:10.1080/19401493.2024.2418813

CityLearn v2: energy-flexible, resilient, occupant-centric, and carbon-aware management of grid-interactive communities

2024· preprint· en· W4396813774 on OpenAlexafffund
Kingsley Nweye, Kathryn Kaspar, Giacomo Buscemi, Tiago Fonseca, Giuseppe Pinto, Dipanjan Ghose, Satvik Duddukuru, Pavani Pratapa, Han Li, Javad Mohammadi, Luís Lino Ferreira, Tianzhen Hong, Mohamed Ouf, Alfonso Capozzoli, Zoltán Nagy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Building Performance Simulation · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsComputer scienceReinforcement learningGridFlexibility (engineering)Distributed computingBenchmarkingEnergy managementEnergy storageEnergy (signal processing)Power (physics)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As more distributed energy resources become part of the demand-side infrastructure, quantifying their energy flexibility on a community scale is crucial. CityLearn v1 provided an environment for benchmarking control algorithms. However, there is no standardized environment utilizing realistic building-stock datasets for distributed energy resource control benchmarking without co-simulation or third-party frameworks. CityLearn v2 extends CityLearn v1 by providing a stand-alone simulation environment that leverages the End-Use Load Profiles for the U.S. Building Stock dataset to create grid-interactive communities for resilient, multi-agent, and objective control of distributed energy resources with dynamic occupant feedback. While the v1 environment used pre-simulated building thermal loads, the v2 environment uses data-driven thermal dynamics and eliminates the need for co-simulation with building energy performance software. This work details the v2 environment and provides application examples that use reinforcement learning control to manage battery energy storage system, vehicle-to-grid control, and thermal comfort during heat pump power modulation.

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)0.003
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations46
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Building Performance SimulationSame topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207