MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246851217 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14658081

Outdoor Thermal Comfort Analysis in a Cold Continental Climate: The Case of a Pedestrian-Only Street in Downtown Toronto

2021· preprint· en· W4246851217 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christopher Marleau

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Heat Island Mitigation
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroclimatePedestrianDowntownThermal comfortThermal sensationEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyUrban designEquivalent temperatureVegetation (pathology)Air temperatureField surveyGeographyClimatologyTransport engineeringCivil engineeringEngineeringUrban planningCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increased interest in urban thermal comfort has emerged in recent years with unpredictable weather patterns and unprecedented temperature extremes around the world. Urban modelling computer software can help with understanding interactions between built environment and microclimates. However, results of simulations can be difficult to interpret if acceptable thermal conditions for a location are unknown. Using a compound approach of field investigation and microclimate modelling for a pedestrian-only street in Toronto, Canada, this study investigates urban outdoor thermal comfort (OTC) in a cold continental climate. Four thermal indices were used to analyze field data and the results were compared with OTC research conducted in other climates. In this study, the Physiological Equivalent Temperature (PET) provided the strongest annual correlation with the pedestrian thermal sensation votes. A PET comfort range between 9°C and 24°C was found. Survey results were then used to interpret the simulated effect of urban vegetation within the case study microclimate during a summer scenario.

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)0.000
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 score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUrban Heat Island MitigationFrench-language works237,207