MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409597846 · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2025.115750

A comprehensive review on definitions, development, and policies of net-zero carbon buildings (nZCBs)

2025· review· en· W4409597846 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dan Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueRenewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsZero (linguistics)Net (polyhedron)Development (topology)Carbon fibersEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceMathematicsAlgorithmLinguisticsPhilosophyGeometryMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The energy consumption and carbon emissions of the building sector are expected to rise significantly in the near future. Net-zero carbon buildings (nZCBs) have emerged as a critical area of research to reduce fossil energy use and greenhouse gas emissions in the building sector. In recent years, leading economic bodies, including China, the United States, Canada, and the European Union etc., have made substantial efforts to advance nZCB initiatives. This study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of nZCBs through three key objectives in leading economic bodies while carrying out a more in-depth analysis of progress in China. First, it reviews and compares nZCB definitions in leading economic bodies, emphasizing critical parameters and boundary conditions. It also investigates the distinctions and overlaps between nZCBs and net-zero energy buildings (nZEBs), providing valuable insights into their unique features. Second, the study outlines mid-to-long term goals for achieving large-scale implementation at various levels, and further investigates the development and current progress of nZCBs in China, and highlights key achievements and pilot projects. Third, the study analyzes various national policies and regional policies , regulations, and guidelines shaping nZCBs development. Additionally, it evaluates certification systems for nZCBs in leading economic bodies, integrating regional characteristics, renewable energy distribution, and diverse building types, and sets carbon emission limits tailored to climate zones and solar radiation levels. This study offers critical insights and strategic recommendations to accelerate nZCB adoption, contributing to long-term sustainability objectives.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations21
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenewable and Sustainable Energy ReviewsSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207