MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405175564 · doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2024.115169

Projecting and estimating HVAC energy savings from correcting control faults: Comparison between physical and virtual metering approaches

2024· article· en· W4405175564 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Andre A. Markus, Jayson Bursill, H. Burak Gunay, Brodie W. Hobson

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy and Buildings · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsSurrey Memorial HospitalCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHVACMetering modeControl (management)Energy (signal processing)Automotive engineeringReliability engineeringComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEngineeringAir conditioningStatisticsMechanical engineeringMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fault-impact analysis (FIA) in heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems involves forecasting system loads in the absence of equipment malfunction and inappropriate sequences of operations with the intention of setting a target for optimal operating energy use and encouraging and augmenting fault correction. Fault correction is an ongoing and resource-intensive endeavor for operations personnel, often motivated by occupant complaints rather than to mitigate excessive operating energy use. Thus, projecting the energy-use impact of faults is imperative to improving building energy efficiency as it leverages the potential to reduce energy use for real-time operational decision-making. Thermal energy meters (i.e., physical meters) can provide post-correction validation by quantifying the energy-use impact of faults, though are incapable of projecting this information before faults are corrected and providing motivation. Additionally, their installation and maintenance costs in existing buildings are often prohibitive. Virtual meters (VMs) which leverage HVAC controls data offer a cost-effective alternative to physical meters. Furthermore, inverse-model (IM)-based VMs enable scalable FIA by employing derived IMs at the system and zone level to emulate alternative control scenarios. This paper presents the first ever field implementation of FIA-capable VM algorithms. An automated and BAS-integrated VM algorithm was deployed in a living-lab facility in Ottawa, Canada, and the VM-estimated energy-use impact of correcting common soft faults is presented and compared with savings reported by thermal meters and savings projected by the FIA. For combined system- and zone-level heating, VMs estimated 85% of the measured energy-use savings, and a 65% reduction in energy use was projected prior to correcting faults where a 62% reduction was realized after faults were corrected. VMs can appropriately assess and project energy savings for fault correction so long as the method to baseline pre-correction energy use persists after correction.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.203 · 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.

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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy and BuildingsSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207