Using 3D CityGML for the Modeling of the Food Waste and Wastewater Generation—A Case Study for the City of Montréal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper explains a workflow to simulate the food energy water (FEW) nexus for an urban district combining various data sources like 3D city models, particularly the City Geography Markup Language (CityGML) data model from the Open Geospatial Consortium, Open StreetMap and Census data. A long term vision is to extend the CityGML data model by developing a FEW Application Domain Extension (FEW ADE) to support future FEW simulation workflows such as the one explained in this paper. Together with the mentioned simulation workflow, this paper also identifies some necessary FEW related parameters for the future development of a FEW ADE. Furthermore, relevant key performance indicators are investigated, and the relevant datasets necessary to calculate these indicators are studied. Finally, different calculations are performed for the downtown borough Ville-Marie in the city of Montréal (Canada) for the domains of food waste (FW) and wastewater (WW) generation. For this study, a workflow is developed to calculate the energy generation from anaerobic digestion of FW and WW. In the first step, the data collection and preparation was done. Here relevant data for georeferencing, data for model set-up, and data for creating the required usage libraries, like food waste and wastewater generation per person, were collected. The next step was the data integration and calculation of the relevant parameters, and lastly, the results were visualized for analysis purposes. As a use case to support such calculations, the CityGML level of detail two model of Montréal is enriched with information such as building functions and building usages from OpenStreetMap. The calculation of the total residents based on the CityGML model as the main input for Ville-Marie results in a population of 72,606. The statistical value for 2016 was 89,170, which corresponds to a deviation of 15.3%. The energy recovery potential of FW is about 24,024 GJ/year, and that of wastewater is about 1,629 GJ/year, adding up to 25,653 GJ/year. Relating values to the calculated number of inhabitants in Ville-Marie results in 330.9 kWh/year for FW and 22.4 kWh/year for wastewater, respectively.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".