MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3098701134

Dans quelles mesures les nouvelles techniques d'aménagement ont-elles un impact sur le climat urbain ?

2020· article· en· W3098701134 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pauline Recurt

Bibliographic record

VenueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New urban planning techniques must take more and more elements into account, including the impact on the cities’ climate. Indeed, anthropogenic activities play an important role in the creation of microclimates that form urban heat islands (UHIs). This master thesis questionnes the impact of these new planning techniques on the urban climate. Urban redevelopment projects, in the context of the fight against UHIs, take many parameters into account, but four have been studied here for their recurrence in all projects: vegetalisation, water management, urban forms and infrastructures. Thus, the examples of the city of Montreal and the Belle-Beille district in Angers have been studied for their representativeness and their innovations. These examples were used as a basis for the results to be exploited and analyzed. Actually, they allowed us to take a step back from the developments that are currently being implemented and their effectiveness. It was also possible to go further in the reflection by presenting the real impact of these new developments techniques and how to evaluate them at different scales, the new techniques being experimented with and the limits and lacks the projects.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.004

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)→Same topicFrench Urban and Social Studies→French-language works237,207→