MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417089351 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v18n4p143

Method for Assessing Thermal and Economic Benefits of Cool Roofs in Unconditioned Buildings

2025· article· W4417089351 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. P. Silva, Deivis Luís Marinoski, Saulo Güths, Roberto Lamberts

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Heat Island Mitigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsRoofThermalHeat flowThermal emittanceUrban heat islandTileAirflowReflective surfacesCooling load

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of cool roofs is a passive technique to reduce the cooling load of buildings in hot climates, moreover, it is use has the potential to mitigate the heat island phenomenon. This study presents a method to quantify and monetize the benefits of applying the cool roof passive technique in buildings without air conditioning. The proposed method can be adapted to other passive techniques. For this study, an experimental step was carried out to measure the thermal emittance and reflectance of fiber cement tile samples. The study also presents a thermoenergetic performance analysis using EnergyPlus simulations. The last part highlights the innovation of this method in relation to other studies, which consists of monetizing the thermal benefits of the cool roof passive technique. The analysis contemplates a single-family residential building model for three cities in different regions of Brazil (Florianópolis/SC, São Paulo/SP and Manaus/AM). Fiber cement tiles in their natural color were considered and painted white, representing a cool roof. The solar reflectance of the white-painted samples was around 50% higher than that of the conventional (unpainted) samples. When comparing conventional and cool roofs, the reduction in heat flow through the roof was over 80 % for all three cities. Although the building analyzed does not have air conditioning, the proposed method makes it possible to quantify the thermal load that the passive technique could avoid. The most significant results were in Manaus, resulting in a possible saving of US 4.2/m² per year.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicUrban Heat Island MitigationFrench-language works237,207