MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1956908576 · doi:10.5539/mas.v9n6p1

Water Bodies an Urban Microclimate: A Review

2015· review· en· W1956908576 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Golnoosh Manteghi, Hasanuddin Bin Limit, Dilshan Remaz

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Heat Island Mitigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroclimateUrban heat islandEvaporative coolerEvapotranspirationEnvironmental scienceWater bodyVegetation (pathology)Urban climatePhysical geographyHydrology (agriculture)Atmospheric sciencesUrban planningGeographyEnvironmental engineeringMeteorologyEcologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In urban areas, water bodies have a positive effect upon microclimate of the surroundings with the relative cooling impact it has on evaporative procedure. Hence, evaporative cooling might be one of the pretty efficient methods of passive cooling for urban spaces and buildings. Differences in temperature between the urban space and the non-urban space which surrounds, is dubbed UHI (Urban Heat Island) effect. Water bodies have also been proven to be influential methods of decreasing urban temperatures. A water body temperature is capable of being lower than the surrounding urban environment around 2 - 6 °C. According to these findings; one may conclude that the rise of evapotranspiration in cities, that has roots in vegetation and water body, can efficiently mitigate the influence of the urban heat island. Unfortunately, the effect that water bodies can have upon urban temperatures has not been thoroughly assessed in previous studies, specifically the difference between the daytime and night time influences of water bodies, and the matter the how urban design may be in influential in moving the cooling influence from the water bodies toward the city. This paper provides a theoretical background for the problem and reviews the related literature.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations184
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicUrban Heat Island MitigationFrench-language works237,207