Lighting characteristics of complex fenestration systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The need for energy conservation in buildings has spurred innovations in window technologies. These products include windows combined with shading devices, and windows featuring complex glazings such as smart glazings, translucent and transparent insulation, patterned or decorative glass. Unfortunately, little is known about their impact on the quality of the indoor environment. This paper addresses the development of new lighting quality indices for the outdoor view (which gives a feeling of connection to the outside), indoor view (which may affect feelings of privacy), and window luminance (which indicates the potential risk of discomfort glare). The new indices were applied to a typical fenestration system, consisting of a clear window equiped with an interior perforated shading screen with opaque and translucent materials. The simulation results indicate that the the light-coloured screen has a significant impact on the outdoor view and window's luminance, depending greatly on the sky conditions. Under clear sky conditions, the window's luminance may be increased by up to 80% compared with overcast sky conditions, particularly for a window with a translucent screen.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".