MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402058464 · doi:10.1061/9780784485590.007

The City of Edmonton’s Leading Sustainable Development: Blatchford District Energy Sharing System

2024· article· en· W4402058464 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aaron McCartie, Lucy Croft

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Energy Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainable developmentEnvironmental planningComputer scienceBusinessEnvironmental sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the closure of the Edmonton City Centre Airport in 2013, the City of Edmonton approved the redevelopment of the 536-acre Blatchford Field, with the vision transforming the Blatchford area into a leading example of sustainable development. The availability such a large unoccupied parcel within Edmonton’s downtown presents a unique opportunity to design an interconnected, sustainable, and low carbon community for over 30,000 residents. The Blatchford development’s heating, cooling, and hot water needs are to be met by an innovative district energy sharing system (DESS). This DESS interconnects all buildings within the development into a nodal network of High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE) piping, delivering ambient temperature water to hyper-efficient building-side heat pumps for heat and cooling. This innovative district energy technology allows for load sharing between buildings and is supplemented with renewable energy sourcing from a geoexchange field and a future sewer heat exchange (SHX) system. There are many novel design features in the Blatchford development that provide insight into how DESSs can be adopted efficiently and effectively to create a self-sustaining low carbon community. Blatchford can be considered a proof of concept of how this technology is not only becoming more accessible, but necessary to reduce emissions in the race to combat climate change.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIntegrated Energy Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207