Human-building interaction through the lens of causality: A data-driven probabilistic causal learning approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• This paper presents a data-driven probabilistic causal learning approach. • The approach enables the discovery of potential causal relationships from observed data. • A case study was conducted to demonstrate the potential of the proposed approach. • Causal occupant behavior models showed improved robustness compared to non-causal models. Understanding how people interact with buildings, i.e., human-building interaction, through the lens of causality is crucial for developing effective building solutions. Causal understanding enables accurate identification of where and how to intervene to improve building performance and occupant satisfaction, as well as estimation of the expected benefits. Despite its importance, causal reasoning to understand human-building interaction in the real world remains challenging due to (i) the difficulty in conducting large-scale controlled experiments and (ii) spurious correlations in observational data. In recent decades, data-driven causal reasoning methods have emerged, enabling further investigation of human-building interaction using observational data. However, existing methods are often inapplicable, as collecting quantitatively and qualitatively sufficient occupant data is difficult in real buildings. To address this, this paper presents a novel data-driven probabilistic causal learning approach involving two steps: (i) probabilistic causal discovery to infer potential causal structures and (ii) causal model training to develop causal models. A case study was conducted using the ecobee Donate Your Data dataset to demonstrate the potential of the proposed approach. We inferred potential causal factors of occupant setpoint adjustment behavior. Subsequently, we developed causal models and compared them with association-based models. Both models showed comparable predictive distributions where the test dataset distribution was similar to that of the training dataset. However, under data shift, the causal models showed better robustness. This suggests that the proposed approach has the potential to enable the development of causal models that may better explain underlying causal relationships and more reliable and robust occupant-centric solutions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".