MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592649233 · doi:10.5539/mas.v11n4p80

Patterns of Urban Heat Island Effect in Adelaide: A Mobile Traverse Experiment

2017· article· en· W2592649233 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ehsan Sharifi, Alì Soltani

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Heat Island Mitigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of South AustraliaCRC for Low Carbon Living
KeywordsUrban heat islandContext (archaeology)TraverseGeographyUrban areaUrban climateEconomic shortageVegetation (pathology)Environmental sciencePhysical geographyMeteorologyUrban planningEcologyArchaeologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urban structure, hard surfaces and shortage of vegetation cause an artificial temperature increase in cities, known as the urban heat island effect. This paper determines the daily patterns of urban heat in Adelaide, Australia. The near-surface temperature profile of Adelaide was mapped in 60 journeys alongside a straight cross route connecting Adelaide Hills to the West Beach between 26 July and 15 August 2013. Results indicate that the most intense urban-rural temperature differences occurred during midnight in Adelaide. However, the afternoon urban heat had more temperature variation in the urban area. In the late afternoon, the near-surface urban heat fluctuates by 2°C within three kilometres and by 1.2°C in just one kilometer. Afternoon heat stress can vary based on space configurations and urban surface covers. Afternoon heat stress causes the highest heat load on urban dwellers. A better understanding of daily urban heat variations in cities assists urban policy making and public life management in the context of climate change.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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