EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 362 (2022) E3S Web Conf., 362 (2022) 08003 References
Open Access
Issue
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 362, 2022
BuildSim Nordic 2022
Article Number 08003
Number of page(s) 8
Section Daylight Components
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202236208003
Published online 01 December 2022
  1. N. Tuaycharoen and P. R. Tregenza, “View and discomfort glare from windows,” Light. Res. Technol., vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 185–200, 2007. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. S.M. Khanie, “Gaze-driven approach for estimating luminance values in the field of view for discomfort glare assessments,” in Cie 2015, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  3. G. Chinazzo, L. Pastore, J. Wienold, and M. Andersen, “A field study investigation on the influence of light level on subjective thermal perception in different seasons,” Wind. Conf. Rethink. Comf., no. April, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  4. Danish Standards Association, “DS/EN 17037 Dagslys i bygninger [Daylight in buildings],” Danske Stand., pp. 1–57, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  5. Boligog Planstyrelsen, “Bygningsreglementet: Lys og udsyn (§ 377 - § 384),” 2018. [Google Scholar]
  6. J. Mardaljevic, “Aperture-Based Daylight Modelling: Introducing the 'View Lumen,'” Proc. Build. Simul. 2019 16th Conf. IBPSA, vol. 16, pp. 1129–1136, 2020. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. W. H. Ko, M. G. Kent, S. Schiavon, B. Levitt, and G. Betti, “A Window View Quality Assessment Framework,” LEUKOS - J. Illum. Eng. Soc. North Am., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 268–293, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  8. H. I. Hellinga, “Daylight and view: the influence of windows on the visual quality of indoor spaces,” TU Delft, Delft University of Technology, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  9. H. Hellinga and T. Hordijk, “The D&V analysis method: A method for the analysis of daylight access and view quality,” Build. Environ., vol. 79, pp. 101–114, Sep. 2014. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. A. Oliva, M. L. Mack, M. Shrestha, and A. Peeper, “Identifying the perceptual dimensions of visual complexity of scenes,” Proc. 26th Annu. Meet. Cogn. Sci. Soc., pp. 1041–1046, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  11. V. Zaikina and B. S. Matusiak, “Verification of the Accuracy of the Luminance-Based Metrics of Contour, Shape, and Detail Distinctness of 3D Object in Simulated Daylit Scene by Numerical Comparison with Photographed HDR Images,” LEUKOS - J. Illum. Eng. Soc. North Am., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 177–188, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  12. G. S. Rubin, “Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity,” Retin. Fifth Ed., vol. 1, pp. 300–306, Jan. 2013. [Google Scholar]
  13. G. Simone, M. Pedersen, and J. Y. Hardeberg, “Measuring perceptual contrast in digital images,” J. Vis. Commun. Image Represent., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 491–506, 2012. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. M. Pavel, G. Sperling, T. Riedl, and A. Vanderbeek, “Limits of visual communication: the effect of signal-to-noise ratio on the intelligibility of American Sign Language,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, vol. 4, no. 12, p. 2355, 1987. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. A. Rizzi, G. Simone, and R. Cordone, “A modified algorithm for perceived contrast measure in digital images,” Soc. Imaging Sci. Technol. - 4th Eur. Conf. Colour Graph. Imaging, Vis. 10th Int. Symp. Multispectral Colour Sci. CGIV 2008/MCS’08, no. January 2008, pp. 249–252, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  16. S. Rockcastle, M. L. Amundadottir, and M. Andersen, “Contrast measures for predicting perceptual effects of daylight in architectural renderings,” Light. Res. Technol., vol. 49, no. 7, pp. 882–903, 2017. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. I. Konstantzos, Y. C. Chan, J. C. Seibold, A. Tzempelikos, R. W. Proctor, and J. B. Protzman, “View clarity index: A new metric to evaluate clarity of view through window shades,” Build. Environ., vol. 90, pp. 206–214, 2015. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. O. Signe Ebsen and O. Jens Christian, “Characterisation of View-Out towards an index for appropriate selection of solar-control systems,” Technical University of Denamark. [Google Scholar]
  19. H. Olsen, “Guide til gode spørgeskemaer,” 2006. [Google Scholar]
  20. “Netigate feedback platform.” [Online]. Available: https://www.netigate.net/. [Accessed: 08-Jul-2022]. [Google Scholar]
  21. “Lameloversigt WINGS-lameller til Blendex solskaerme,” 2011. [Google Scholar]
  22. J. Wienold and J. Christoffersen, “Evaluation methods and development of a new glare prediction model for daylight environments with the use of CCD cameras,” Energy Build., vol. 38, no. 7, pp. 743–757, 2006. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. “R: The R Project for Statistical Computing.” [Online]. Available: https://www.r-project.org/. [Google Scholar]
  24. D. Bates, M. Mächler, B. M. Bolker, and S. C. Walker, “Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4,” J. Stat. Softw., vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 1–48, Oct. 2015. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.