MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2474445233 · doi:10.3390/rs8070568

Estimation of Continuous Urban Sky View Factor from Landsat Data Using Shadow Detection

2016· article· en· W2474445233 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Matúš Hodúl, Anders Knudby, Hung Chak Ho

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicRemote Sensing and Land Use
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSimon Fraser University
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceLidarRemote sensingPixelMeteorologyGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sky View Factor (SVF, a dimensionless value between 0 and 1 representing obstructed and unobstructed sky, respectively) has an important influence on urban energy balance, and is a key contributor to the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect experienced by heavily built up regions. Continuous urban SVF maps used in modeling the spatial distribution of UHI can be derived analytically using Lidar data; however, Lidar data are costly to obtain and often lack complete coverage of large cities or metropolitan areas. This study develops and validates a method for estimating continuous urban SVF from globally available Landsat TM data, based on the presence of shadows cast by SVF-reducing urban features. SVF and per-pixel shadow proportion (SP) were first calculated for synthetic grid cities to confirm a logarithmic relationship between the two properties; then Lidar data from four US cities were used to determine an empirical regression relating SP to SVF. Spectral Mixture Analysis was then used to estimate per-pixel SP in a Landsat 5 TM image covering the Greater Vancouver Area, Canada, and the empirical regression was used to calculate SVF from per-pixel SP. The accuracy of the resulting SVF map was validated using independent Lidar-derived SVF data (R2 = 0.78; RMSE = 0.056).

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 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

Citations33
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing and Land UseFrench-language works237,207