## 2 Literature Review  
Recent research has demonstrated that individuals residing in naturally ventilated buildings possess superior thermal self-regulation compared to those in air-conditioned environments [17], indicating a heightened adaptability to fluctuating environmental conditions. The findings emphasize the influence of physiological acclimatization when accounting for the variations in thermal comfort between the two groups. Among the methods for facilitating natural ventilation, manually opening windows remains the most accessible and widely used approach. One study explored the impact of passive facade geometry optimization on enhancing natural ventilation and indoor air quality in office settings [18]. By employing simulation tools, the study compared passive and conventional facade systems under the climatic conditions of Amman, Jordan. The findings revealed improvements in indoor air quality, pinpointed areas with reduced airflow, and identified zones of elevated turbulence, thereby informing more effective space usage. Another investigation evaluated the effectiveness of passive facade control mechanisms concerning annual energy consumption reductions [19]. Hybrid systems have been identified as the most effective solution for achieving considerable energy reductions, whereas passive systems offer an optimal compromise between performance and cost. In contexts demanding elevated thermal comfort or where they are subject to considerable climatic fluctuations, automated systems are preferable. The suitability of each system is climate-dependent: passive strategies are more effective in tropical climates, while hybrid configurations perform better in subtropical and temperate regions. Recent investigations have emphasized the advantages of combining passive facades with HVAC systems [20], particularly when integrated into the building's southern elevation and linked to the air handling unit (AHU) to supply air preheated within the facade cavity. Research has shown that placing passive facades at a distance from the ventilation unit, in conjunction with air extraction systems, enhances indoor air circulation, ensuring a more uniform distribution of fresh air. An experimental analysis [21] evaluating natural versus mechanical ventilation in a passive facade demonstrated that mechanical systems increase airflow and lower internal heat gains by 18.77%. However, the added energy demand of fans, typically 10-15 W, somewhat offsets these gains. To address this, an optimization framework comprising four strategies was introduced to better balance mechanical ventilation and energy use. Modifying the cavity depth yielded a 4-7% enhancement in energy efficiency. These findings underline the capacity of mechanical ventilation to limit thermal loads while proposing practical measures to optimize overall energy performance. This study focuses on enhancing the energy efficiency of heritage buildings by employing passive facades, with an assessment of heating and cooling loads under Mediterranean and temperate oceanic climate conditions [22]. Various glass facade configurations were examined, demonstrating that the low-emissivity passive (double-layer) facade offers the highest efficiency in winter, while the reflective passive facade performs optimally during summer, achieving energy savings of up to 26.70 kWhT/m2 and 4.70 kWhT/m2, respectively. Natural ventilation proves beneficial only when paired with a compatible facade type; combining reflective passive facades with appropriate ventilation strategies can result in additional savings of up to 7.20 kWhT/m2. In warmer regions, passive facades incorporating photovoltaic elements present a promising alternative. Further analysis [23] explores passive facade systems from energy, exergy, exergoeconomic, and enviroeconomic standpoints, addressing system performance, payback periods, economic viability, and environmental implications. The findings underscore the interdependence between facade geometry, thermal and airflow dynamics, and system efficiency.