MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381163833 · doi:10.32920/23542023.v1

Numerical Investigation of the Built Urban Environment Immersed in Atmospheric Boundary Layer

2023· preprint· en· W4381163833 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jiaxiang Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsComputational fluid dynamicsInflowCFD in buildingsAerodynamicsMeteorologyPlanetary boundary layerWind speedTurbulenceWind directionBoundary layerEnvironmental scienceLarge eddy simulationMarine engineeringAerospace engineeringEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis focuses on numerical investigation of the built-environment immersed in atmospheric boundary layer using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD). The thesis has two parts. In part 1, Pedestrian Level Wind (PLW) maps were developed for downtown Toronto using a novel CFD model linked with Meteorology data at Toronto airport weather stations. This resulted in real-time and statistical wind speeds at pedestrian level. Resulting wind speeds were validated using measurements from a local weather station at University of Toronto. In part 2, a new inflow turbulence generator was developed to obtain accurate aerodynamic forces for tall buildings using Large Eddy Simulation. The model relies on calibrating an existing inflow generator to improve its accuracy. The resulting model yielded average of 10% lower error for the dynamic forces compared with the uncalibrated model. The presented CFD models in parts 1 and 2 lead to accurate wind engineering applications in the built-environment.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207