When do Indians feel hot? Internet searches indicate seasonality suppresses adaptation to heat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a warming world an increasing number of people are being exposed to heat, making a comfortable thermal environment an important need. This study explores the potential of using Regional Internet Search Frequencies (RISF) for air conditioning devices as an indicator for thermal discomfort (i.e. dissatisfaction with the thermal environment) with the aim to quantify the adaptation potential of individuals living across different climate zones and at the high end of the temperature range, in India, where access to health data is limited. We related RISF for the years 2011–2015 to daily daytime outdoor temperature in 17 states and determined at which temperature RISF for air conditioning starts to peak, i.e. crosses a 'heat threshold', in each state. Using the spatial variation in heat thresholds, we explored whether people continuously exposed to higher temperatures show a lower response to heat extremes through adaptation (e.g. physiological, behavioural or psychological). State-level heat thresholds ranged from 25.9 °C in Madhya Pradesh to 31.0 °C in Orissa. Local adaptation was found to occur at state level: the higher the average temperature in a state, the higher the heat threshold; and the higher the intra-annual temperature range (warmest minus coldest month) the lower the heat threshold. These results indicate there is potential within India to adapt to warmer temperatures, but that a large intra-annual temperature variability attenuates this potential to adapt to extreme heat. This winter 'reset' mechanism should be taken into account when assessing the impact of global warming, with changes in minimum temperatures being an important factor in addition to the change in maximum temperatures itself. Our findings contribute to a better understanding of local heat thresholds and people's adaptive capacity, which can support the design of local thermal comfort standards and early heat warning systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".