ArticleScientific reports2026
Deployable knowledge-data hybrid models for day-ahead cooling load prediction under data scarcity: a case study and performance validation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traditional data-driven models for building cooling load prediction often fail during the initial operational stage due to insufficient training data, leading to unreliable forecasts. To address this challenge, a knowledge-data hybrid forecasting framework was proposed, it combines simplified heat-transfer-based load calculations with deep learning networks, where physics-based load estimates are embedded as auxiliary inputs to guide the data-driven predictor. Four models were evaluated, including three knowledge-embedded variants (using theoretical fresh-air load, envelope heat-transfer load, and their combination) and a purely data-driven CNN–LSTM baseline. Validated on an actual building under varying training-data richness, models based on the proposed framework reduce prediction errors by 39% to 69% and decrease error variance by nearly an order of magnitude compared with the baseline while effectively mitigating overfitting in small-sample scenarios. The computational simplicity and reliance only on easily accessible data underscore its practical value for early-stage engineering deployment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.