MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285729706 · doi:10.1007/s44223-022-00008-7

Recent advances in modeling turbulent wind flow at pedestrian-level in the built environment

2022· review· en· W4285729706 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jiading Zhong, Jianlin Liu, Yongling Zhao, Jianlei Niu, Jan Carmeliet

Bibliographic record

VenueArchitectural Intelligence · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyNational University of Defense TechnologySun Yat-sen UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaConcordia UniversitySchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceComputational fluid dynamicsPedestrianLarge eddy simulationReynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equationsSimulationTurbulenceMeteorologyEngineeringAerospace engineeringCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pressing problems in urban ventilation and thermal comfort affecting pedestrians related to current urban development and densification are increasingly dealt with from the perspective of climate change adaptation strategies. In recent research efforts, the prime objective is to accurately assess pedestrian-level wind (PLW) environments by using different simulation approaches that have reasonable computational time. This review aims to provide insights into the most recent PLW studies that use both established and data-driven simulation approaches during the last 5 years, covering 215 articles using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and typical data-driven models. We observe that steady-state Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (SRANS) simulations are still the most dominantly used approach. Due to the model uncertainty embedded in the SRANS approach, a sensitivity test is recommended as a remedial measure for using SRANS. Another noted thriving trend is conducting unsteady-state simulations using high-efficiency methods. Specifically, both the massively parallelized large-eddy simulation (LES) and hybrid LES-RANS offer high computational efficiency and accuracy. While data-driven models are in general believed to be more computationally efficient in predicting PLW dynamics, they in fact still call for substantial computational resources and efforts if the time for development, training and validation of a data-driven model is taken into account. The synthesized understanding of these modeling approaches is expected to facilitate the choosing of proper simulation approaches for PLW environment studies, to ultimately serving urban planning and building designs with respect to pedestrian comfort and urban ventilation assessment.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations38
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchitectural IntelligenceSame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207