2023
DOI: 10.1016/j.jobe.2023.106511
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Investigating the reliability of building energy models: Comparative analysis of the impact of data pipelines and model complexities

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, standardizing the output features by a geometrical unit was performed to allow future comparative analyses. Saad and Eicker compared numerous standardization methods reporting the per conditioned volume area as the least biased within different data types and spatial scales [70]. The study's feature selection processes have resulted in the use of the features in Table 7.…”
Section: Mvlr Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, standardizing the output features by a geometrical unit was performed to allow future comparative analyses. Saad and Eicker compared numerous standardization methods reporting the per conditioned volume area as the least biased within different data types and spatial scales [70]. The study's feature selection processes have resulted in the use of the features in Table 7.…”
Section: Mvlr Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Policymakers commonly use geospatial tools to perform these types of analyses. However, a gap exists in the linkage process among the encoding of geospatial datasets and their processing towards creating urban building energy models, which results in discrepancies in accuracy (Saad and Eicker, 2023). For example, the building rating systems that are developed to help quantify the energy usage of individual buildings and, subsequently, their emissions as part of regional and national strategies to reduce energy usage are not often integrated or interoperable with geospatial datasets and tools.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%