MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Urban climate walk: A stop-and-go assessment of the dynamic thermal sensation and perception in two waterfront districts in Rome, Italy

2022· article· en· W4283025649 on OpenAlex
Zhikai Peng, Ronita Bardhan, Colin G. Ellard, Koen Steemers

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBuilding and Environment · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Heat Island Mitigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSapienza Università di Roma
KeywordsThermal sensationThermal comfortPerceptionGeographyEnvironmental scienceConfoundingClimate changeDiversity (politics)MeteorologyPsychologyMathematicsStatisticsEcologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study set out to understand the dynamics of human thermal sensation and perception associated with outdoor thermal variability in urban contexts. Previous studies found that compact urban forms and green features can contribute to urban climate diversity, and conjectured whether the wax and wane of thermal stress can promote thermal satisfaction in outdoor public spaces. Hence, a stop-and-go method has been developed to accurately capture thermal transitions along urban walks and to provide snapshots of the momentary body thermal sensation and subjective thermal perception. The measurement campaigns carried in late summer involved a total of 40 participants walking for 70 min through two waterfront districts in Rome, Italy. Our findings indicate that: (1) the oscillation of air temperature along the dense urban walk (R2=0.74) is nearly twice as frequent as that along the sparse suburban walk (R2=0.23), due to the microclimatic diversity shaped by the compact urban fabrics, pocket parks and tree-lined river banks; (2) the Universal Thermal Climate Index (UTCI) contrast can effectively predict thermal alliesthesia (R2=0.34) measured by the rate of change of mean skin temperature (d(Tmskin)/dt < 0.012°C∙min−1); (3) subjective perception shows a significant trend but a poorer model fit (R2<0.25) predicted by UTCI and Tmskin; (4) two confounders, view and social backgrounds, are proved to affect the regression model between the objective and subjective data. The conclusions emphasise the importance of incorporating spatial and social contexts into the investigation of outdoor thermal comfort via physiological and psychological approaches.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.216 · 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