Multi-criteria thermal resilience certification scheme for indoor built environments during heat waves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With climate change, the indoor built environment is expected to influence the occupant's safety and well-being significantly. A novel multi-criteria thermal resilience certification scheme for indoor built environments during extreme heat events is proposed in this paper. The certification scheme considers overheating, thermal comfort, heat stress, and hygrothermal discomfort in built environments. These criteria are quantified using key performance indicators like indoor overheating degree, hours of exceedance, wet-bulb globe temperature, and heat index, respectively. This scheme is developed based on existing best practices like standards, rating systems, and literature. The scheme is implemented on a benchmark building energy performance model for detached post-World War II dwellings in Belgium as a case study using weather data measured from the City of Brussels. The indoor overheating in the reference dwelling is assessed with a static threshold of 27°C for the bedrooms and adaptive thresholds for other areas. The analysis found that the building performance is within the defined threshold levels throughout the heat wave duration for all criteria. Therefore, the reference dwelling got a maximum attainable score of four points and is rated five-star for thermal resilience during heat waves. The proposed certification scheme is intended as a standardized framework and highlights the need for further revisions in building performance policies and guidelines.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".