Energy savings from photosensors and occupant sensors/wall switches on a college campus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report the savings realized by the use of lighting controls across a college campus in southern Ontario, Canada. The campus had an extensive lighting system of addressable dimming ballasts, controlled and monitored centrally. Of the 2295 luminaires from which we recovered data, 87 were controlled by 62 photosensors; these were in rooms that also featured a manual control system (wall switch/dimmer/preset scenes) and occupancy sensor. The site was monitored from mid-April to mid-July, 2008. Substantial energy savings were realised by the control system, though savings varied greatly by control type, room type, and by day. Manual use of wall switches and switching by occupancy sensors contributed most to savings. Meaningful additional savings were contributed by dimming, either by a photosensor or use of preset scenes. We provide a detailed breakdown of the savings by control and room type. Note that in a large space occupant sensors/wall switches affected all luminaires, whereas photosensors affected only those luminaires close to windows or skylights.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".