Comment on essd-2022-257
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human thermal comfort measures the combined effects of temperature, humidity, and wind speed, etc., and can be aggravated under the influences of global warming and local human activities. With the most rapid urbanization and the largest population, China is being severely threatened by aggravating human thermal stress. However, the variations of thermal stress in China at a fine scale have not been fully understood. This gap is mainly due to the lack of a high-resolution gridded dataset of human thermal indices. Here, we generate the first high spatial resolution (1 kmï1 km) dataset of monthly human thermal index collection (HiTIC-Monthly) over China from 2003 to 2020. In this collection, 12 commonly used thermal indicators are generated by the LGBM machine learning algorithm from multi-source gridded data, including MODIS land surface temperature, topography, land cover and land use, population density, and impervious surface fraction. Their accuracies were comprehensively assessed based on observations at 2419 weather stations across the mainland of China. The results show that our dataset has desirable performance, with mean R2, root mean square error, mean absolute error, and bias of 0.996, 0.693 °C, 0.512 °C, and 0.003 °C, respectively, by averaging the 12 indicators. Moreover, the predictions exhibit high agreements with observations across spatial and temporal dimensions, demonstrating the broad applicability of our dataset. The comparison with two existing datasets also suggests that our high-resolution dataset can describe a more explicit spatial distribution of the thermal information, showing great potentials in fine-scale (e.g., intra-urban) study. Further investigation reveals that nearly all indicators exhibit increasing trends in most parts of China during the year 2003~2020. The increase is especially stronger in North China, Southwest China, the Tibetan Plateau, and parts of Northwest China, and in the spring and summer seasons. The HiTIC-Monthly dataset is publicly available via https://zenodo.org/record/6895533 (Zhang et al., 2022a).
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 | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.030 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.056 | 0.052 |
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".