MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2740134290 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v10n4p11

Designing Thermally Pleasant Open Areas: The Influence of Microclimatic Conditions on Comfort and Adaptation in Midwest Brazil

2017· article· en· W2740134290 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julia Romero Lucchese, Wagner Augusto Andreasi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Heat Island Mitigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroclimateThermal comfortEnvironmental scienceAdaptation (eye)ShadingEquivalent temperatureScale (ratio)Field surveyGeographyMeteorologyPhysical geographyComputer scienceCartographyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing temperatures in urban areas can negatively affect the health and comfort of its dwellers. Thus, this study assessed thermal comfort conditions in a public square, located in hot-humid Midwest Brazil, based on the relationship between microclimate conditions, thermal sensations and adaptation. Data used were collected through micrometeorological measurements and questionnaire surveys, which were performed simultaneously in field campaigns during hot and cold seasons. The aim was to propose design guidelines for open areas according to local thermal preferences. An updated regionally-calibrated Physiological Equivalent Temperature (PET) assessment scale is also proposed. Neutral temperatures were estimated on a seasonal basis and critical discomfort hours on a monthly basis. The results reaffirm that psychological and behavioral factors influence the individuals’ assessment of the outdoor thermal environment and therefore should be considered as design criteria. To improve the microclimate of urban open areas in Campo Grande, shading must be provided primarily by trees and resting areas should be protected from wind exposure. The use of water features for evaporative cooling purposes is not recommended, however, drinking fountains should be available in public squares. Such results can be used by landscape architects and urban planners to deliver thermally comfortable open spaces, encouraging greater use and increased length of stay in these areas.

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)0.001
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations18
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicUrban Heat Island MitigationFrench-language works237,207