Influence of meteorological conditions on the intensity and form of the urban heat island effect in Regina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the influence of meteorological conditions on the intensity and spatial configuration of the urban heat island effect in Regina, Saskatchewan. A sample of 31 nocturnal heat island intensities measured via automobile surveys averages 3°C, with a maximum intensity reaching 7.5°C. On nights with clear skies and light winds, heat island morphology in Regina is characterized by a clearly defined cliff, plateau, and peak. Regression analysis reveals that heat island intensities are highly sensitive to changes in wind conditions, and relatively insensitive to changes in humidity and atmospheric pressure. However, when antecedent weather conditions preceding each heat island event are included in the analysis, cloud cover supersedes wind speed as a more important control on heat island intensity. Daytime and post‐sunset cloud cover explain 20 percent more variance in the ensuing nocturnal heat island intensities than do daytime and post‐sunset wind speeds. This result challenges the widely‐held notion that wind speed is a more important heat island control than sky cover. Cette étude se penche sur l'influence des conditions météorologiques sur l'intensité et la configuration spatiale de l'effet d'îlot thermique urbain à Régina, Saskatchewan. Un échantillon de 31 intensités d'îlots thermiques nocturnes prélevées par automobile atteint une moyenne de 3°C, avec une intensité maximale de 7,5°C. Par nuit claire et vent léger, la morphologie des îlots thermiques à Régina est nettement caractérisée par un courant ascentionnel, un palier et une crête. L'analyse de régression révèle que les intensités d'îlots thermiques sont très sensibles aux changements de vents coincidents, et relativement insensibles aux changements d'humidité et de pression atmosphérique. Cependant, quand les conditions atmosphériques précédant chaque effet d'îlot thermique sont prises en considération, la couverture nuageuse supplante la vitesse du vent comme contrôle majeur de l'intensité. Quand on compare couverture nuageuse et vitesse du vent pendant la journée et après le coucher du soleil, la valeur explicative de la première est de 20 pour cent supérieure à celle de la dernière en ce qui concerne la variation d'intensité dans les îlots thermiques nocturnes qui s'ensuivent. Ce résultat remet en question la ‘conviction’ que dans le contrôle des îlots thermiques, la vitesse du vent est plus importante que la couverture nuageuse.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".