1 IEA HPP Annex 28 North American Test Procedures and Calculations for Residential Heat Pumps with Combined Space and Domestic Hot Water Heating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This intermediate report gives an overview of the North American test procedures and calculations for residential appliances with separate and combined space and domestic hot water heating, and a short market survey of combined operating heat pump systems (Task 1). The hot water heat pumps (HWHP) markets in Canada and United States are relatively weak, and declined during the last two decades, notably because the total installed cost is more than double than of conventional equipment. The hot water heat pump have not marketed aggressively in Canada, and such a result awareness of product was very low or non-existent before 1995. However, the residential exhaust-air heat pump market has increased since 1995 when regulations for mechanical ventilation became mandatory. The combined appliances, while still low in number of sales, are developing a niche in new construction where the winter climate is not too severe. The alternate operation mode is not yet very common, but simultaneous space cooling or heating, and hot water heating units containing refrigerant-to-water heat exchangers, are finding greater use and are now offered by a few manufacturers. In North America, most ground-source systems are installed with desuperheaters while few air-source units are so equipped. Depending of electricity costs relative to competing fuels, the HWHP may consume 40
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.072 | 0.055 |
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".