A Fuzzy Adaptive Comfort Temperature Model with
Grey Predictor for Multi-agent Control System of
Smart Building
Zhu Wang, Rui Yang, Lingfeng Wang, Robert C.
Green II
Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer
Science
University of Toledo
Toledo, OH, USA
Lingfeng.Wang@utoledo.edu
Abstract — In this paper a fuzzy adaptive comfort temperature
(FACT) model has been proposed for the intelligent control of
smart buildings. A multi-agent control system is applied for the
energy management and building operation. Particle Swarm
Optimization (PSO) is applied to optimize the set points based on
the comfort zone. Integrating a grey predictor to predict outdoor
temperature with the FACT model shows great promise in
systematically determining the customer temperature comfort
zone for smart buildings. With the application of the FACT
model and other intelligent technologies, the multi-agent control
system has successfully provided a high-level of temperature
comfort with low power consumption to customers in smart
building environments. Case studies and corresponding
simulation results are presented and discussed in this paper.
Keywords- Fuzzy logic; grey prediction; optimization; smart
building; energy efficiency
I. INTRODUCTION
At the cutting-edge of modern building management
technologies, smart buildings are utilizing computers and
intelligent technologies to manage energy consumption and the
indoor environment autonomously. Smart buildings have
shown several advantages such as providing high-level comfort
to customers, minimizing power consumption, and reducing
impacts on the environment [1, 2]. In order to make the smart
building environmentally friendly, renewable energy sources
have been employed as the primary power supply. Through the
use of an intelligent control system a high-level of comfort and
power-efficiency should be easily achieved in a smart building
environment.
The indoor temperature, the indoor air quality, and the
indoor illumination are the most important comfort-impact
factors in smart buildings [3]. Our previous work [4] has
proposed a multi-agent control system with heuristic
optimization for the comfort and energy management of smart
buildings. Occupants are provided with a high level of
flexibility in order to participate in the control of system
behaviors. This means that they can set up their own
978-1-4244-7835-4/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE
Anastasios I. Dounis
Department of Automation
Technological Educational Institute of Piraeus
Egaleo, Greece
aidounis@otenet.gr
preferences through a Graphical User Interface (GUI) [4]. For
indoor temperature control, users define their own comfort
zone by setting the parameters of minimum temperature and
maximum temperature [Tmin, Tmax]. Through the use of Particle
Swarm Optimization (PSO) the control system is able to
autonomously find the optimal set point that lies in the user-
defined comfort zone. According to previous works regarding
the variation of indoor temperature [5]-[8], the indoor comfort
temperature is determined by a combination of the control
system and the variations in outdoor temperature. Other factors
including the business culture and metabolic rates of
individuals also have an impact when determining the most
comfortable indoor temperature.
In this paper we introduce a fuzzy adaptive comfort
temperature (FACT) model integrated with a grey predictor
that enables the prediction of outdoor temperatures. When
applying the FACT model one important issue is the prediction
of meteorological parameters. This is an interesting and
challenging issue since the weather data is typically
complicated and disordered. Short-term prediction is used to
make use of the most recent data to forecast the future. This is
called local prediction. A Grey predictor is employed in this
model due to its good performance in local predictions despite
requiring a limited amount of past data to make these
predictions. As compared to methods that use only customer-
defined comfort zones, the FACT model improves the
determination of the temperature limits systematically without
the intervention of users, achieves energy savings, and
enhances the intelligence of the building management system.
Managers are also provided an upper level of overreaching
controls in order to simplify the control process.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section
II briefly reviews the multi-agent control system for smart
buildings. Section III represents the fuzzy adaptive comfort
temperature model including a detailed description of the grey
predictor. In section IV case studies and simulation results are
presented. The conclusion and future work are given in Section
VI.
728
 II. MULTI-AGENT CONTROL SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
A hierarchical, multi-agent technology is applied to the
control system in smart buildings. This design utilizes multiple
agents that are placed on different layers to achieve the control
goal of maximizing customer comfort while minimizing energy
consumption. Fig. 1 illustrates the structure of the multi-agent
control system. Based on the different functionalities all of the
agents are classified into four different layers. A switch agent
lies on the first layer; the second layer contains a central
coordinator-agent; the third layer is populated by three local
controller-agents that control three primary comfort impact
factors; and the fourth layer contains a load agent. The control
goal can be achieved through the coordination and cooperation
of all the agents.
Figure 1. The structure of the multi-agent control system for smart building
A. Switch Agent
The switch agent is the bridge between the utility grid and
the smart building. It determines whether or not the building
should connect to or disconnect from the utility grid by
monitoring the current condition of the utility grid. As shown
in Fig. 1, the renewable energy source is the primary energy
supply and the utility grid is the secondary energy source.
When the smart building connects to the utility grid, the switch
agent determines and monitors the energy flow to ensure
maximum benefit for its inhabitants. The switch agent
purchases energy from the utility grid when the renewable
energy is insufficient and sells the redundant energy back to the
grid when the renewable energy production is larger than the
building’s energy consumption. The switch agent can
disconnect the smart building from the utility grid when
“abnormalities” occur. These include electrical disturbances
and unacceptably high power rates.
B. Central Coordinator-agent
The primary task of the central coordinator-agent is to
coordinate the power dispatch and maximize customer comfort.
It determines the power dispatch to the load agent and multiple
local controller-agents in order to maximize the overall comfort
value according to the customer’s preference. This is done
through the consideration of the online energy production and
the outdoor environmental information. The proposed
729
mathematical model of the comfort value that needs to be
maximized is defined as follows:
Comfort = μ1[1 − (eT / Tset ) 2 ] + μ 2 [1 − (eL / Lset ) 2 ]
+ μ 3 [1 − (e A / Aset ) 2 ]
(1)
where Comfort is the overall customer comfort (in the range of
[0,1] ) and μ1, μ2, and μ3 are the user-defined weighting factors
which indicate the importance of three comfort factors and
resolve the possible equipment conflicts. Customers can set
their own preferred values in different situations through GUIs.
All user-defined weighting factors fall into the range of [0,1]
and the sum of μ1, μ2, and μ3 must be equal to one. Tset, Lset, and
Aset represent the set points of the temperature, the illumination,
and the air quality respectively. They can be obtained from the
particle swarm optimizer. The value for e is the error between
the measured value and set value. The measured value can be
obtained from the multiple, local controller-agents.
C. Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)
Particle swarm optimization is first proposed as a self-
adaptive and population based algorithm by Kennedy and
Eberhart in 1995 [9, 10]. It only has a few parameters needing
to be adjusted, and it is easier to escape from the local best
solutions and find the global best solution. PSO has turned out
to be a powerful tool to solve highly complex problems such as
large-scale non-linear optimization.
Similar to other evolutionary technologies, in PSO a
population of particles is initialized first. Every potential
solution is seen as a particle in PSO, and each particle includes
both location vector l and the velocity vector v. Through
adjusting the velocity and memorizing the current location, the
particle moves towards its local best location pbest and finally
finds the global best location gbest in the search space.
The update rules are presented as follows:
v ( k + 1) = ϕ × v ( k ) + ω1r1 ( pbest ( k ) − l ( k ))
(2)
+ ω 2 r2 ( g best ( k ) − l ( k ))
l (k + 1) = l (k ) + v(k + 1) (3)
ϕ = ϕ max − (ϕ max − ϕ min ) × k n / k max (4)
where φ is the inertia weight, φmax and φmin are the maximum
value and minimum value of the inertia weights; ω1 and ω2 are
two acceleration constants, r1 and r2 are two random numbers
from [0,1]; k is the iteration index, kn is the current iteration
number and kmax is the maximum number of iterations [11, 12].
The procedures of the PSO are listed as follows:
1) Randomly initialize a population of particles;
2) Evaluated the finess value to each particel according to
the objective function.
3) Calculate pbest and gbest for each particel;
 4) Adjust the velocity and location of each particle based
on the update rules (2)(3)(4);
5) Repeat 2) to 4) until the desired number of iteration is
achieved or the optimal solution is attained.
The Set-Point Particle Swarm Optimizer (SP-PSO) is
embedded in the central coordinator-agent to tune the set points
according to the outdoor information and the customer comfort
zone. The optimization goal is to maximize the objective
function defined in (1). In our previous work people are
provided with the flexibility to set their own comfort zones. In
this paper we provide a new comfort temperature model which
can automatically find the temperature comfort zone while
customers still have flexibility to fine tune the control system
by adjusting their degree of acceptability.
D. Local controller-agents
Local controller-agents are implemented in three local
subsystems to control temperature comfort, visual comfort, and
air quality. Fig. 2 shows the structure of the local subsystems.
Figure. 2 The structure of the local controller-agent
The local controller-agent employs a fuzzy controller to
determine the actual power to be used. It uses the dispatched
power from the central coordinator-agent, the error between
real environmental parameters, and the set points as inputs to
its fuzzy controller. Fuzzy rules are applied to calculate the
required power in uncertain circumstances. Then a comparison
is carried out between the required power calculated and the
adjusted power calculated by the central coordinator-agent in
order to determine the actual power. The actuators are driven
by the actual power used to control indoor environmental
parameters that influence users’ overall comfort level. The
actuators are auxiliary heating/cooling, electrical lighting, and
ventilation for controlling the thermal comfort, visual comfort,
and air quality. In this way the indoor environmental
parameters can be controlled by the corresponding actuators in
local subsystems.
E. Load Agent
The load agent controls all the interruptible loads. Any
equipment that has no direct connections to the three main
comfort factors is considered to be interruptible loads.
730
Considering the different functionalities of buildings and the
variety of equipment they contain, customers should be given
the authority to manage the controllable loads based on their
own preferences. The load agent, when it is activated, is used to
decide the priority and the amount of load shed based on the
users preferences. More energy may be dispatched to the
comfort-related elements to maintain high-level comfort after
the load agent is working.
III. FUZZY ADAPTIVE COMFORT TEMPERATURE (FACT)
MODEL
A. Adaptive Comfort Temperature Model
Beyond a simple logical algorithm, adaptive control is an
artificial intelligence technology which can be used for
empirical and judgmental information [6, 7]. The adaptive
models have recently been applied to define the indoor comfort
temperature as a linear regression which is related to outdoor
information. This can be expressed by an equation of the form:
Tc = C + KTo (5)
where Tc is the indoor comfort temperature (°C), To is the
outdoor temperature (°C) and C and K are constants. For
different buildings the constants C and K are found to be
distinct. For naturally ventilated buildings, which have heating
in the winter and are free-running (no cooling or mechanical
ventilation) in summer, the American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning (ASHRAE) standard (55-
2004) adapts the model as follows:
Tc = 17.8 + 0.31To (6)
Adaptive comfort temperature models are now included in
the Chartered Institute of Building Engineers (CIBSE) (2006)
guidelines and most recently the European Committee for
Standardization (CEN) standard EN 15251 has adopted the
following model:
Tc = 18.8 + 0.33To (7)
Considering the effect of both heating and free-running
situations, the equations for indoor comfort temperature models
are different because the indoor temperature is decoupled from
the outdoor temperature by the heating control when the
heating is turned on. It has been shown that heating systems are
more likely to be on than off when running mean outdoor
temperature (Tmr) is less than 10°C. In CIBSE 2007 and CEN
Standard EN 15252-2007 the equations linking comfort
temperature to outdoor temperature are:
Tc = 18.8 + 0.33Tmr , Tmr ≥ 10 °C (free-running) (8)
Tc = 22.6 + 0.09Tmr , Tmr <10 °C (heating on) (9)
 ~ ~
In [7], Peeters uses a new parameter named To,ref to define where α~ , β and T are fuzzy numbers and
the comfort temperature. The modified set of equations is
shown as: α~1 = (lα 1 , mα 1 , rα 1 ) (18)
~
β1 = (lβ 1 , mβ 1 , rβ 1 ) (19)
T + 0.8Tk −1 + 0.4Tk −2 + 0.2Tk −3
To,ref = k (10)
2 .4 α~2 = (lα 2 , mα 2 , rα 2 ) (20)
~
Tc = 16.63 + 0.36To,ref , To, ref ≥ 12.5 °C (free-running) (11) β 2 = (lβ 2 , mβ 2 , rβ 2 ) (21)
~
Tc = 20.4 + 0.06To, ref , To, ref <12.5 °C (heating on) (12) To, ref = (lo , mo , ro ) (22)
~
Tc = (lc , mc , rc ) (23)
where To,ref is the reference outdoor temperature (°C), Tk is the
arithmetic average of today’s maximum and minimum outdoor Equations (16) and (17) above are combined with Equation
temperature (°C), Tk-1 is the arithmetic average of yesterday’s (10) to form the FACT model to the multi-agent control system
maximum and minimum outdoor temperature (°C), Tk-2 is the of the smart building.
arithmetic average of the day before yesterday’s maximum and
minimum outdoor temperature (°C), and Tk-3 is the arithmetic C. Fuzzy Arithmetic Operations
average of maximum and minimum outdoor temperature of ~
three days ago (°C). Assume two generalized triangular fuzzy numbers X1 and
~ ~ ~
For air-conditioned buildings the correlation between X 2 where X 1 = (a1 , b1 , c1 ) and X 2 = (a2 , b2 , c2 ) . Using the
comfort temperature and outdoor temperature is given by [13]: fuzzy arithmetic operators from [14] and [15] the following
equations can be given:
Tc = 18.6 + 0.16To (13) 1) Fuzzy Numbers Addition ⊕
~ ~
As the primary goal of the smart building is to provide a X1 ⊕ X 2 = (a1 , b1 , c1 ) ⊕ (a2 , b2 , c2 )
high comfort level to customers, a naturally ventilated building = (a1 + a2 , b1 + b2 , c1 + c2 ) (24)
cannot be the best choice for a smart building. We propose a
mixed building model which provides heat to the building in
the winter and cooling in the summer. The comfort temperature 2) Fuzzy Numbers Multiplication ⊗
correlated to the outdoor temperature for smart buildings has ~ ~
been proposed using the following equations: X 1 ⊗ X 2 = (a1 , b1 , c1 ) ⊗ (a2 , b2 , c2 )
= (a1 × a2 , b1 × b2 , c1 × c2 ) (25)
Tc = 18.6 + 0.16To, ref , To, ref ≥ 18 °C (air-conditioner on) (14)
We consider three fuzzy
~ ~
Tc = 20.4 + 0.06To, ref , To, ref <18 °C (heating on) (15)
numbers α = (lα , mα , rα ) , β = (lβ , mβ , rβ )
~
and To, ref = (lo , mo , ro ) , where l, m, and r are real numbers.

B. Fuzzy Adaptive Comfort Temperature Model Utilizing the fuzzy arithmetic operators ⊕ and ⊗ , the
Changing outdoor weather conditions, internal heat gains, following fuzzy adaptive comfort temperature model is
ventilation, and the preferences of users all influence the indoor developed:
environment of a smart building leading to different comfort
profiles for different persons. The acceptable comfort ~
temperature regions are formulated by an upper and a lower Tc = (lc , mc , rc )
limit which defines the comfort temperature band. In this paper ~ ~
= α~ ⊕ β ⊗ T o, ref (26)
a new method to determine the upper (Tmax) and the lower
(Tmin) bounds of the temperature band based on Equations (14) = (lα + l β lo , mα + mβ mo , rα + rβ ro )
and (15) is proposed. This method can be implemented using
the following fuzzy equations: The relationship of these fuzzy numbers is lc=lα+lβlo,
mc=mα+mβmo and rc=rα+rβro.
~ ~ ~
Tc = α~1 + β1 × To,ref , To, ref ≥ 18 °C (air-conditioner on) (16) The user participates in the control process by defining the
“α” that is the acceptability degree of comfort temperature. The
~
~ ~ ~ α level determines the crisp set, that is, the lower Tcα, min and the
Tc = α~2 + β 2 × To ,ref , To, ref <18 °C (heating on) (17) ~
upper Tcα, max comfort temperatures in Equations (27) and (28).

731
 ~
Tcα, min = mc − α (mc − lc ) (27) dx (1)
= x (1) (i ) + x (1) (i − 1) = x ( 0) (i ) (32)
dt
~
Tcα, max = mc + α ( rc − mc ) (28)
And by approximating x(1) with ½[x(1)(i)+x(1)(i-1)], Equation
(30) can be rewritten as,
The acceptability degree, α, will substantially change the
acceptance comfort zone. It is obvious that the bandwidth of
the comfort zone will extend when the acceptable degree, α , is x ( 0) (i ) + a ⋅ y (1) (i ) = b (33)
changed.
The parameters a and b can be obtained by using the Least
D. Grey Predictor Square Error Method in Equation (34)
Generally, a grey system means that the information
regarding the system is incomplete or uncertain. By using a
grey model that requires little previous data to perform a real- ⎡a ⎤ T −1 T
time forecast, the grey predictor has been successfully ⎢ ⎥ = ( B B) B Z n (34)
b
⎣ ⎦
employed in many areas. A first order linear dynamic grey
model, GM(1,1), is applied to make short-term predictions of
where
the future average outdoor temperature on a daily basis [16].
Local prediction forecasts of the future based on the most ⎡− y (1) (2) 1⎤
recent data set are a type of time series. Suppose we have the ⎢ (1) ⎥
− y (3) 1⎥
previous values of x from the time k-m to k-l, that is x(k-1), x(k- B=⎢ (35)
2), …, x(k-m). The next time interval values, x(k), can be
⎢ # #⎥
⎢ (1) ⎥
predicted by a grey model. The algorithm of this first order ⎣⎢ − y ( n) 1⎦⎥
grey model GM(1,1) is as follows [17].
and
Assume the original raw data series x(0) with n samples is
defined as x(0)=[ x(0)(1), x(0)(1), x(0)(2), .., x(0)(n)]. All values in ⎡ x ( 0) (2) ⎤
this data sequence are required to be positive. When negative ⎢ ( 0) ⎥
x (3) ⎥
values appear in this sequence the absolute value of the Zn = ⎢ (36)
maximum negative data is added to all the data in the sequence ⎢ # ⎥
to make the data sequence positive. ⎢ ( 0) ⎥
⎢⎣ x (n)⎥⎦
To weaken the randomness of the original raw data, the
original raw data x(0) is pre-processed and transformed into a The solution of equation (30) is an exponential function
new sequence x(1) using the accumulated generating operations with the initial condition x(1)(0)= x(0)(1). The predicted value
(AGO). can be obtained as

i b b
xˆ (1) (n + 1) = ( x ( 0) (1) − ) ⋅ e − an + (37)
x (1) (i ) = AGO( x ( 0) (i )) = ∑
k =1
x ( 0) (k ), i = 1,..., n (29) a a

Applying the inverse AGO to xˆ (1) (n + 1) , we can have the

Therefore, the new raw data series is defined as x(1)=[
x(1)(1), x(1)(1), x(1)(2), .., x(1)(n)]..The x(1) sequence can be predicted value for xˆ ( 0) (n + 1) as
modeled by a first-order differential equation that is defined as ( 0) (1) (1)
xˆ (n + 1) = xˆ (n + 1) − xˆ (n) . Usually the number of used
data in a grey model is rather small. Therefore, the grey model
is often used as a local prediction scheme. The grey model
dx (1)
+ ax (1) = b (30) prediction can be viewed as a curve fitting approach and is
dt employed in this study.
where a is the development coefficient and b is the grey control
variable. We now define y(1)(i) as the sequence obtained by IV. CASE STUDY AND SIMULATION RESULTS
applying the MEAN operation to x(1) as seen in Equation (31). Two sets of data of the daily average temperatures are
collected from [18] regarding the area around Toledo, OH in
the US. The first data set is a winter daily average temperatures
1 (1) from Jan 1th to January 15th in 2011; the second data set is a
y (1) (i ) = MEAN ( x (1) ) = [ x (i ) + x (1) (i − 1)], i = 1,..., n (31)
2 summer data set from August 1th to August 15th in 2010. By
applying a grey predictor we can forecast the average
Suppose the sampling time is normalized as 1. From temperature of the next day by analyzing the former three day’s
Equation (29) we have realistic data. The temperature in the first three days is used for

732
prediction and the temperature for Day 4 through Day 15 is comfort temperature zones. The temperature is taken as the
forecasted. Table I and Table II show the comparison between most important comfort impact factor in the control of the
the predicted temperature and the realistic temperature. smart building. The user-defined weighting factors are set as
μ1=1 and μ2=μ3=0. According to Equations (16) and (17) all of
TABLE I. THE PREDICTED TEMPERATURE AND THE REALISTIC
the fuzzy members should be defined. Based on Equations (14)
TEMPERATURE IN WINTER and (15), we set the fuzzy member as:
Winter data set α~ = (l , m , r ) = (16.6,18.6,20.6)
1 α1 α1 α 1 (38)
(Jan.4-Jan.15) /°C ~
Date Real Predicted
β1 = (l β 1 , mβ 1 , rβ 1 ) = (0.13,0.16,0.19) (39)
temperature temperature
α~2 = (lα 2 , mα 2 , rα 2 ) = (18.4,20.4,22.4) (40)
Day 1 5.4
~
Day 2 -6.3 β 2 = (l β 2 , mβ 2 , rβ 2 ) = (0.03,0.06,0.09) (41)
Day 3 -2.9
~
Day 4 -0.9 1.4 To, ref = (lo , mo , ro ) = (To, ref − 2, To, ref , To, ref + 2)(°C ) (42)
Day 5 -5.6 -8.1
For T0,ref, we use Equation (10) to calculate the reference
Day 6 -3.4 -0.5 temperature using the information from the grey predictor.
Day 7 -6.7 -8.9 Considering that the reference temperature is related to the
Day 8 -8.5 -9.9 temperature of the past three days, only 12 days’ (Day 4 – Day
Day 9 -8.9 -9.2
15) reference temperatures can be obtained out of the 15 days
of outdoor temperature information. The customer acceptability
Day 10 -4.4 1.8 degree is defined as α=0.8. For comparison, the user defined
Day 11 -4.6 -4.7 temperature comfort zones in both winter and summer periods
Day 12 -5.1 -5.5 are set to [Tmin, Tmax] =[20,24 ](°C) .
Day 13 -7.1 -8.6 In the first case the predicted daily average temperature in
Day 14 -6.3 -5.4 winter is used. The FACT model is applied to calculate the
Day 15 -2.8 1.9
comfort zone [Tmin, Tmax] and the set points are tuned by the P-
PSO algorithm. Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 illustrate the comfort zone and
the set point both with and without the FACT model. The
TABLE II. THE PREDICTED TEMPERATURE AND THE REALISTIC comfort zone after applying the FACT model is lower than
TEMPERATURE IN SUMMER
before. This demonstrates that the PSO has successfully found
Summer data set the set points.
(Aug.4-Aug.15) /°C Fig. 5 shows the energy saving advantage of the FACT
Date Real Predicted model. The power consumption for the local temperature
temperature temperature
controller-agent is obviously reduced under the effect of FACT
Day 1 24.2 model. The FACT model not only provides a more rational
Day 2 23.5 comfort zone systematically to enhance customers comfort
level, but also reduces the power consumption of the building.
Day 3 25.6
These advantages achieve the requirements of the control
Day 4 25.7 25.8 system for smart building.
Day 5 25.8 25.9
The second case uses the summer set data to control the
Day 6 23.4 21.2 building and to observe the effect of the FACT model during
Day 7 23.1 22.8 hotter weather. Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 are the comfort zones and set
Day 8 24.5 25.9 points with and without FACT model in this case. Fig. 8 is the
comparison of the power consumption under these situations.
Day 9 25.7 26.9
Day 10 26.8 27.9
Day 11 25.2 23.6
Day 12 24.6 24.0
Day 13 28.1 32.0
Day 14 26.3 24.6
Day 15 26.7 27.1

Based on the two data sets, two case studies are conducted
in this section by utilizing the FACT model to determine the

733
 30 35

25
30
20
Temperature(C)

Temperature(C)
15 Upper Comfort Temperature 25
Low er Comfort Temperature
10 Set Points
Outdoor Temperature 20
5
Upper Comfort Temperature
0 Low er Comfort Temperature
15
Set Points
-5 Outdoor Temperature

-10 10
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Time (Day)
Time (Day)

Figure 3. Comfort zone and set points with FACT model in winter Figure 6. Comfort zone and set points with FACT model in summer

35
30

25 30

20

Temperature(C)
25
Temperature(C)

15 Upper Comfort Temperature

Low er Comfort Temperature
10
Set Points 20
5 Outdoor Temperature
Upper Comfort Temperature
Low er Comfort Temperature
0 15
Set Points
-5 Outdoor Temperature
10
-10 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Time (Day)
Time (Day)
Figure 7. Comfort zone and set points without FACT model in summer
Figure 4. Comfort zone and set points without FACT model in winter
10

30
With FACT model
8
Without FACT model
25
Power Consumption (KW)
Power Consumption (KW)

6
20

15 4

With FACT model

10
Without FACT model 2

5
0
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
0 Time (Day)
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Time (Day) Figure 8. Power consumption for local temperature controller-agent with and
without FACT model in summer
Figure 5. Power consumption for local temperature controller-agent with and
without FACT model in winter According to our current results, the FACT model can
provide high-level of comfort temperature in any outdoor
situation and significantly save energy in order to maximize the
customer benefit. It can be concluded that the FACT model is a
suitable method for smart building as it enhances the
intelligence and optimizes the entire building system.

734
 V. CONCLUSION
This study applied the FACT model with grey predictor to
the control system of a smart building. From the simulation
results, the appropriateness of this model is demonstrated and
discussed. The customers systematically attain a more
reasonable comfort temperature with less power consumption
when using the FACT model. In future studies similar adaptive
comfort models for visual comfort and air quality will be
developed in order to enhance the overall comfort level of the
smart building while consuming minimum energy.

REFERENCES
[1] http://www.smart-buildings.com
[2] J. Hang, J. Tian and H. Lin, “Application of artificial neural network in
intelligent building,” Proc. IEEE Int. Joint Conf. on Machine Learning
and Cybernetics, vol.7, pp. 4215 – 4220, Aug 2007
[3] A.I. Dounis and C. Caraiscos, “Advanced control systems engineering
for energy and comfort management in a building environment—A
review,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol.13, issue 6-7,
pp. 1246–1261, August – September 2009.
[4] Z. Wang, R. Yang, L. Wang and A.I. Dounis, “Customer-centered
Control System for Intelligent and Green Building with Heuristic
Optimization,” IEEE Power System Conference and Exposition,
Phoenix, AZ, March 2011
[5] K. W. H. Mui and W. T. D. Chan, “Adaptive comfort temperature model
of air-conditioned building in Hong Kong”, Building and Environment,
vol.38, pp 837 – 852, June 2003
[6] K. J. McCatney and J. F. Nicol, “Developing an adaptive algorithm for
Europe,” Energy and Buildings, vol.34, pp623-635, 2002
[7] L. Peeters, R. de Dear, J. Hensen, and W. D’haeseleer, “Thermal
comfort in residential buildings: Comfort values and scales for building
energy simulation,” Applied Energy, vol.86, pp. 772-780,May 2009
[8] J. A. Orosa, “A new modeling methodology to control HVAC systems,”
Expert Systems with Applications,vol.38, pp.4505-4513, April 2011
[9] J. Kennedy and R. Eberhart, “Particle swarm optimization,” Proc. IEEE
Int. Joint Conf. on Neural Network, vol.4, pp1942-1948, 1995.
[10] F. Lin, L. Teng, J. Lin and S. Chen, “Recurrent functional-link-based
fuzzy-neural-network-controlled induction generator system using
improved particle swarm optimization,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, vol.56, pp1557-1577, May 2009
[11] M. R. AlRashidi and M. E. El-Hawary, “A survey of particle swarm
optimization applications in electric power system,” IEEE Transaction
on Evolutionary Computation, vol.13, pp913-918, June 2008
[12] B. Zhao, C. X. Guo and Y. J. Cao, “A multiagent-based particle swarm
optimization approach for optimal reactive power dispatch,” IEEE
Transaction on Power Systems, vol.20, pp 1070-1078, May 2005
[13] M. Humphreys, F. Nicol, S. Roaf and O. Sykes, Standards for Thermal
Comfort Indoor air temperature standards for the 21st century,
Routledge, UK, 1995
[14] S. H. Chen, “Operations on fuzzy numbers with function principle,”
Tamkang J. Manag. Sci., vol.6, pp13-25, 1985
[15] SJ. Chen and SM. Chen, “Fuzzy risk analysis based on similarity
measures of generalized fuzzy numbers”, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy
Systems, vol. 11, pp. 45-56, February 2003.
[16] A. I. Dounis, P. Tiropanis, D. Tseles, G. Nikolaou, and G. P. Syrcos, A
Comparison of Grey Model and Fuzzy Predictive Model for Time Series,
International Journal of Engineering and Mathematical Sciences 2:3 pp.
176-181, 2006.
[17] S.-F. Su, C.-B. Lin, Y.-T. Hsu, A high precision global prediction
approach based on local prediction approaches, IEEE SMC-C, Vol.23,
No.4, Nov. 2002, pp. 416-425.
[18] http://www.wunderground.com

735