Development of a distributed building fault detection, diagnostic, and evaluation system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces a distributed system for building fault detection, diagnostic, and evaluation (FDDE). The design of the distributed system aims to address computation and network limitations on a common commercial building automation system (BAS). This system also aims to be adaptable to different fault detection and fault diagnostics algorithms developed by other researchers. The fault evaluation aspect of the system provides quantitative impact metrics of the potential faults to the building operators. Probabilistic representations of faults and symptoms are used, and a continuous symptom severity value is developed to provide more granularity over the abnormal operation information. The proposed method is then tested with five fault cases simulated in EnergyPlus. Results show reduced false positive rate and enhanced fault belief when using a dynamic Bayesian network (DBN) over the conventional event-based Bayesian network (BN) used in fault diagnostics. Fault evaluation based on continuous symptom severity provides a reasonable quantitative reference for building operators to make informed decisions. This system will be further expanded with more fault detection algorithms and tested inside real buildings, and a framework will be made available for other researchers to develop upon.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".