MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385578400 · doi:10.1007/s43762-023-00101-1

Urban cooling potential and cost comparison of heat mitigation techniques for their impact on the lower atmosphere

2023· article· en· W4385578400 on OpenAlex
Ansar Khan, Laura Carlosena, Samiran Khorat, Rupali Khatun, Debashish Das, Quang‐Van Doan, Rafiq Hamdi, Sk Mohammad Aziz, Hashem Akbari, M. Santamouris, Dev Niyogi

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

VenueComputational Urban Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Heat Island Mitigation
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNuclear Safety and Security CommissionUniversity of Texas at AustinNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsUrban heat islandEnvironmental scienceRoofGreen roofAlbedo (alchemy)MeteorologyWeather Research and Forecasting ModelAtmospheric sciencesVegetation (pathology)Urban climateThermal comfortMetropolitan areaUrban planningCivil engineeringGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cool materials and rooftop vegetation help achieve urban heating mitigation as they can reduce building cooling demands. This study assesses the cooling potential of different mitigation technologies using Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF)- taking case of a tropical coastal climate in the Kolkata Metropolitan Area. The model was validated using data from six meteorological sites. The cooling potential of eight mitigation scenarios was evaluated for: three cool roofs, four green roofs, and their combination (cool-city). The sensible heat, latent heat, heat storage, 2-m ambient temperature, surface temperature, air temperature, roof temperature, and urban canopy temperature was calculated. The effects on the urban boundary layer were also investigated. The different scenarios reduced the daytime temperature of various urban components, and the effect varied nearly linearly with increasing albedo and green roof fractions. For example, the maximum ambient temperature decreased by 3.6 °C, 0.9 °C, and 1.4 °C for a cool roof with 85% albedo, 100% rooftop vegetation, and their combination. The cost of different mitigation scenarios was assumed to depend on the construction options, location, and market prices. The potential for price per square meter and corresponding temperature decreased was related to one another. Recognizing the complex relationship between scenarios and construction options, the reduction in the maximum and minimum temperature across different cool and green roof cases were used for developing the cost estimates. This estimate thus attempted a summary of the price per degree of cooling for the different potential technologies. Higher green fraction, cool materials, and their combination generally reduced winds and enhanced buoyancy. The surface changes alter the lower atmospheric dynamics such as low-level vertical mixing and a shallower boundary layer and weakened horizontal convective rolls during afternoon hours. Although cool materials offer the highest temperature reductions, the cooling resulting from its combination and a green roof strategy could mitigate or reverse the summertime heat island effect. The results highlight the possibilities for heat mitigation and offer insight into the different strategies and costs for mitigating the urban heating and cooling demands.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.267 · 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