MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071396745 · doi:10.1103/physreve.66.026204

Urban growth simulation from “first principles”

2002· article· en· W2071396745 on OpenAlexaff
Claes Andersson, Kristian Lindgren, Steen Rasmussen, Roger White

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrban sprawlComputer sciencePercolation (cognitive psychology)Variety (cybernetics)Statistical physicsRelation (database)Urban planningField (mathematics)Work (physics)DiffusionEconomic geographyArtificial intelligenceMathematicsPhysicsEcologyGeographyData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

General and mathematically transparent models of urban growth have so far suffered from a lack in microscopic realism. Physical models that have been used for this purpose, i.e., diffusion-limited aggregation, dielectric breakdown models, and correlated percolation all have microscopic dynamics for which analogies with urban growth appear stretched. Based on a Markov random field formulation we have developed a model that is capable of reproducing a variety of important characteristic urban morphologies and that has realistic microscopic dynamics. The results presented in this paper are particularly important in relation to "urban sprawl," an important aspect of which is aggressively spreading low-density land uses. This type of growth is increasingly causing environmental, social, and economical problems around the world. The microdynamics of our model, or its "first principles," can be mapped to human decisions and motivations and thus potentially also to policies and regulations. We measure statistical properties of macrostates generated by the urban growth mechanism that we propose, and we compare these to empirical measurements as well as to results from other models. To showcase the open-endedness of the model and to thereby relate our work to applied urban planning we have also included a simulated city consisting of a large number of land use classes in which also topographical data have been used.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.253 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations62
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topicsSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207