MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415975578 · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2025.104545

Standardised framework for analysis of greenhouse performance using key performance indicators

2025· article· en· W4415975578 on OpenAlexafffundabout
William Sylvain, Timothé Lalonde, Danielle Monfet, Didier Haillot

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGreenhouse Technology and Climate Control
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureHôpital Notre-Dame
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNature
KeywordsKey (lock)Performance indicatorGreenhouseGreenhouse gasPerformance measurement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT There is a growing interest in sustainable and year-round food production through protected agriculture. Greenhouses play a key role in this transition, but their performance varies significantly with climate conditions and operational strategies. OBJECTIVE As a result, this study proposes a standardised and practical framework for evaluating greenhouse performance, grounded in a systematic analysis of key performance indicators (KPI). METHODS A total of 16 key performance indicators (KPI) were identified from the literature and classified into three main categories: thermal, daylighting, and energy. From these, a refined set of 10 KPI was selected based on their applicability, non-redundancy, and relevance for both passive and active greenhouses. These KPI were applied to a case study involving a naturally ventilated, free-standing Gothic arch greenhouse, modelled using the TRNSYS dynamic simulation software. The model was validated using measured data and used to assess greenhouse performance under three distinct Canadian climates: cold (Montréal), very cold (Baie-Comeau), and subarctic (Kuujjuaq). RESULTS AND CONCLUSION The analysis revealed that while some KPI, such as the average indoor air temperature ( T ¯ a i , ND ) and daily light integral ( DLI ), are essential for assessing crop survival, others provided insights into growing potential, operational climate control or the environmental and economic viability of the system. This study introduced two refined indicators for greenhouse cultivation in cold climates: TGSL limit , which excludes lethal short-term cold events, and OGSL , which combines temperature and daylight to define realistic growing conditions. These demonstrated that combining different classes of KPI enabled more meaningful, comparative assessments of greenhouse suitability, offering practical guidance for optimising crop production and energy use under diverse climates. SIGNIFICANCE This work contributes to a standardised and practical framework for evaluating greenhouse performance, paving the way for more informed decision-making in controlled environment agriculture.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgricultural SystemsSame topicGreenhouse Technology and Climate ControlFrench-language works237,207