MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403945001 · doi:10.3390/buildings14113486

Advances in Cold-Climate-Responsive Building Envelope Design: A Comprehensive Review

2024· review· en· W4403945001 on OpenAlex
Zahra Al-Shatnawi, Caroline Hachem-Vermette, Michael Lacasse, Bahador Ziaeemehr

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBuildings · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuilding envelopeEnvelope (radar)Architectural engineeringCold climateEngineeringSystems engineeringAerospace engineeringComputer scienceMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extreme low temperatures, heavy snowfall, ice accumulation, limited daylight, and increased energy consumption in cold climates present significant challenges but also offer opportunities for improving building efficiency. Advanced materials and technologies in climate-responsive envelopes can enhance sustainability, reduce carbon footprints and operational costs, and improve thermal comfort under these environmental conditions. This literature review combines theoretical aspects of building performance in cold climates with a summary of current and critical applications in building envelope design, identifying research gaps and proposing future research directions. It has been shown that various BIPV systems require further climate-based studies to optimize solar energy yield. For example, integrating PV layers and PCM within DSFs can reduce cooling loads, but more research is needed on PCM transition temperatures and ventilation strategies in cold climates. A notable research gap exists in building-integrated vegetative systems, particularly regarding soil thickness, irrigation, hygrothermal performance, and snow accumulation. Despite excellent winter performance in buildings incorporating CLT components, they face increased cooling energy consumption and potential overheating in summer. Additionally, the high initial moisture content in CLT raises the risk of mold growth, especially when covered with vapor-tight layers. The design examples in this paper emphasize the need for further investigation to achieve sustainable, low-carbon, energy-efficient envelope designs for cold climates.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.279 · 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