[Bldg-sim] cheat-gpt

Wed Dec 10 22:40:17 PST 2025

👍

Chris reacted via Gmail
<https://www.google.com/gmail/about/?utm_source=gmail-in-product&utm_medium=et&utm_campaign=emojireactionemail#app>

On Wed, 10 Dec 2025, 21:36 , <chris.malcolm.yates at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
>
>
> I’m very grateful for everyone’s thoughts. Speaking of LMs I’ve opened a
> NotebookLM on this thread, by copying the text and pasting it in as a
> source. It gave this summary, and a nice little mind map:
>
> The provided text consists of an email chain from December 2025 among
> building simulation professionals discussing the *existential threat and
> ethical risks posed by Large Language Models (LLMs) and generative AI* to
> their industry, specifically focusing on energy modelling and certification
> processes like LEED. *Chris Yates initiates the discussion* by
> questioning the value of modelling professionals if AI can easily generate
> seemingly legitimate reports and outputs, suggesting solutions like tying
> design models to building operation calibration and placing model input
> files in escrow. *Other contributors elaborate on the dangers of
> fabricated documentation* and the erosion of human decision-making, with *Bill
> Bishop proposing ethical mandates* such as requiring human review and
> clear identification of all AI-assisted content. *Karen Walkerman
> highlights the actual value of human modelers* in providing design
> feedback and building calibration, while *Richard Sapwell reinforces the
> need for human expertise* in regulatory interpretation and systems
> thinking to move beyond easily commoditised paperwork. Collectively, the
> emails explore how to *safeguard professional value by reinforcing
> verifiable modelling practices* against the rise of sophisticated
> automated reporting.
>
>
>
> I hope loading your contributions into NotebookLM is OK with you all.
> Please let me know if you want them removed, or if you want me to share it
> with you… it even generated a podcast!
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
> Chris
>
> *From:* Bill Bishop <William.J.Bishop at imegcorp.com>
> *Sent:* 10 December 2025 16:25
> *To:* Karen Walkerman <kwalkerman at gmail.com>; Chris Yates
> chris.malcolm.yates at gmail.com; David S Eldridge
> deldridge at grummanbutkus.com
> *Cc:* bldg-sim at onebuilding.org
> *Subject:* RE: [Bldg-sim] cheat-gpt
>
>
>
> There may be no way to put the AI genie back in the bottle at this point.
> The temptation is growing larger every day to wish for more wishes.
>
>
>
> We tell ourselves that we’ll only use AI to do grunt work like report
> writing. Next, we’ll extend that to templates that help auto-generate model
> inputs, and model geometry. We’ll upload project drawings to our AI agents
> to generate more model inputs. Of course those project drawings will be
> generated by AI to some extent, and a larger extent over time. We’ll use AI
> to auto-populate model input and output tables to facilitate report
> writing. At every step along the way, there will be less human decision
> making and less human review of assumptions – and less need to hire and
> train new professionals and maintain professional credentials. Five years
> from now, design firms will simply prompt the building-generative AI:
> “Design an office building large enough for 150 employees, at least two
> stories but no more than eight, to be built at the corner of Elm Street and
> Asimov Ave. Base it on the architectural style of Gehry but with more
> windows. Use all-electric building systems. Optimize for maximum on-site
> renewable energy generation.” The AI will generate the drawing set and
> specs but the design won’t accommodate 150 employees because the HR-AI told
> the Design-AI that the Management-AI will be recommending layoffs.
>
>
>
> Sure, we can do damage control by proposing specific new requirements for
> some types of projects, but there are many applications of energy modeling
> and we should strive for adopting some simple, elegant, universal language
> and limitations governing AI use that can be applied to all energy modeling
> projects. All professions should be developing and adopting revised ethical
> codes to limit the real and perceived short- and long-term damage to the
> value our professions provide. Some ideas for sample language:
>
>    - All design decisions will be made by humans.
>    - All content and deliverables that have been created with AI
>    assistance will be clearly identified as such.
>    - All AI-generated content and deliverables will be reviewed for
>    accuracy by humans consistent with standard QA/QC procedures.
>    - QA/QC procedures will be performed by humans without AI-assisted
>    autocorrections.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> ~Bill
>
>
>
> *William Bishop*, PE, CEM, LEED AP, ASHRAE (BEMP, BEAP, CDP)
> Associate Principal | Project Executive | Sustainability & Energy
>
> [Human-generated. I am not a robot.]
>
> [image: now IMEG] <https://www.imegcorp.com/>
>
> *IMEG* | *formerly
> Pathfinder                                                 *(585)
> 698-1956 | phone
>
> 134 South Fitzhugh Street | Rochester, NY 14608               (315)
> 879-1122 | mobile
>
> William.J.Bishop at imegcorp.com  *website* <https://imegcorp.com/>* | *
> *vCard*
> <https://dynasend.com/signatures/vcard/William.J.Bishop-at-imegcorp.com.vcf>
> * | **map*
> <https://www.google.com/maps/place/Pathfinder+Engineers+%26+Architects+LLP/@43.1504815,-77.6145058,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x89d6b4fe9e48aab1:0x6991ae3d559d5aee!8m2!3d43.1504776!4d-77.6119309!16s%2Fg%2F1tcw955j?hl=en&entry=ttu>
> [image: Twitter] <https://merlin.allaboutbirds.org/> [image: Facebook]
> <https://fossilfreefunds.org/>  [image: LinkedIn]
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/imeg-corp>
>
> Learn more <https://www.imegcorp.com/about/our-story/> about us and the
> IMEG story!   Ride your bike!  [image: A person on a motorcycle
> Description automatically generated]
>
>
>
> *From:* Bldg-sim <bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org> *On Behalf Of *Karen
> Walkerman via Bldg-sim
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2025 9:25 AM
> *To:* Chris Yates <chris.malcolm.yates at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* bldg-sim at onebuilding.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Bldg-sim] cheat-gpt
>
>
>
> *External Email: *Treat links and attachments with caution.
>
> This is very timely... We're giving a webinar next Wednesday, Dec 17th at
> 12pm EST where we discuss our AI approach (and share the EP3 AI
> integration).
>
>
>
> https://ep3.solutions/webinarsignup/
>
>
>
> I firmly believe that the value of energy modeling lies in the ability of
> modelers to provide feedback at the SD, CD and value-engineering stages of
> a project, and as a tool to catch building operation issues if a model
> calibration is completed.
>
>
>
> Other than delivering LEED points, a lot of LEED models don't deliver true
> value to the project, but that is where projects have a budget for
> modeling.
>
>
>
> With EP3, the goal is to provide one tool that allows modelers to easily
> provide design feedback and develop the final model for LEED, incentive, or
> code compliance.
>
>
>
> We'll be discussing all of it on Wednesday - come join if you're
> interested
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Karen
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2025, 14:44 Chris Yates via Bldg-sim <
> bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org> wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
>
>
> Just a philosophical one; maybe even an existential one 😐
>
>
>
> Given LLMs’ “autocorrect on steroids” abilities, what risk do we see
> ourselves exposed to as modelling professionals?
>
>
>
> Let’s give an example…
>
>    - A full LEED application including reports, unmet load tables,
>    “error” reports.
>    - Not based on modelling – all reports and outputs generated with LLMs.
>
>
>
> I think it would be relatively easy to do this, and present something that
> would stand up to review.
>
>
>
> I think this poses the following questions:
>
>    1. If our main value offering can be replaced with auto-complete, what
>    is the value of what we’re doing, anyway?
>    2. How can we improve the value?
>    3. How can we protect that value?
>
>
>
> I’d like to propose some solutions:
>
>    - Tie Design stage models into the Operation of the building –
>    calibrate
>    - Rather than just submitting reports, place model input files into
>    *escrow* with GBCI (or their local equivalent)
>
>
>
> Controversial?
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Chris
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bldg-sim mailing list
> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list send  a blank message to
> BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE at ONEBUILDING.ORG
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/vnd.google.email-reaction+json
Size: 37 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20251211/754708a3/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20251211/754708a3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 420 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20251211/754708a3/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 387 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20251211/754708a3/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2724 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20251211/754708a3/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 5138 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20251211/754708a3/attachment-0003.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 342 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20251211/754708a3/attachment-0004.png>