MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401459985 · doi:10.35490/ec3.2024.263

Evaluating the Capabilities of Surrogate Modeling Techniques in Predicting Hourly Building Energy Consumption

2024· article· en· W4401459985 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shivram Krishnan, Anagha Divakaran, Omprakash Ramalingam Rethnam, Elin Markarian, Seif Qiblawi, Albert Thomas, Elie Azar

Bibliographic record

VenueComputing in construction · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanada Research ChairsDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
KeywordsEnergy consumptionComputer scienceReliability engineeringSurrogate modelEfficient energy useMachine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building energy simulation models have strong energy prediction capabilities but suffer from high computational costs, which could be reduced through surrogate modeling approaches. Existing surrogate models predict energy consumption on an annual resolution, however, for strategizing net-zero measures, granular predictions are necessary. This paper evaluates the ability of four state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms to predict building energy consumption on an hourly basis. The results indicate that Random Forest Regression is the most suitable predictive model due to the high R2 value of 0.94. The proposed framework can be further expanded to test net-zero energy retrofits at minimal computational costs.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputing in constructionSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207