MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412204577

IEA EBC Annex 80 - Dynamic simulation guideline for the performance testing of resilient cooling strategies:Version 2

2023· report· en· W4412204577 on OpenAlexaff
Chen Zhang, Ongun Berk Kazanci, Shady Attia, Ronnen Levinson, Sang Hoon Lee, Peter Holzer, Ramin Rahif, Agnese Salvatif, Anaïs Machard, Mamak Pourabdollahtootkaboni, Abhishek Gaur, Bjarne W. Olesen, Per Heiselberg

Bibliographic record

VenueORBi (University of Liège) · 2023
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire dynamics and safety research
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuidelineEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceReliability engineeringOperations researchEngineeringMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of Annex 80 is to develop, assess and communicate solutions for resilient cooling. The systematic assessment of resilient cooling strategies is one of the main activities of Annex 80. The previous approach for assessing the resilience of cooling strategies is mainly based on qualitative comparison and based on results from individual research, which lacks common boundary conditions and universal indicators for resilience evaluation. This study aims to provide a consistent approach for assessing the resilience of different cooling strategies by dynamic simulation. Various cooling strategies will be tested on the reference buildings under present and future weather conditions in different climate zones, and proposed key performance indicators will be applied to evaluate summertime overheating risk and climate resistance of cooling strategies.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0070.003
Research integrity0.0090.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.034

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueORBi (University of Liège)Same topicFire dynamics and safety researchFrench-language works237,207