MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388723541 · doi:10.3390/buildings13112868

Increasing Solar Reflectivity of Building Envelope Materials to Mitigate Urban Heat Islands: State-of-the-Art Review

2023· article· en· W4388723541 on OpenAlexafffund
Bahador Ziaeemehr, Zahra Jandaghian, Hua Ge, Michael Lacasse, Travis Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueBuildings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Heat Island Mitigation
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaConcordia University
FundersInfrastructure CanadaNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsUrban heat islandEnvironmental scienceBuilding envelopeEmissivityReflective surfacesSolar gainSolar energyPassive coolingLow emissivityPassive solar building designMeteorologyEngineering physicsThermalEngineeringGeographyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Urban Heat Island (UHI), a consequence of urban development, leads to elevated temperatures within cities compared to their rural counterparts. This phenomenon results from factors such as urban designs, anthropogenic heat emissions, and materials that absorb and retain solar radiation in the built environment. Materials commonly used in cities, like concrete, asphalt, and stone, capture solar energy and subsequently emit it as heat into the surroundings. Consequently, this phenomenon amplifies summertime cooling energy demands in buildings. To mitigate the UHI impacts, various mitigation strategies have emerged that include but are not limited to using higher solar reflectivity materials, known as “cool materials”, and increasing vegetation and greenery in urban areas. Cool materials have high reflectivity and emissivity, effectively reflecting solar radiation while emitting absorbed heat through radiative cooling. Increasing the solar reflectivity of building envelope materials is a promising sustainable solution to lessen the UHI effects. This state-of-the-art review summarizes the UHI causes and effects, states the mitigation strategies, describes the cool building envelope materials, explains the solar reflectivity index measurements, indicates the building and micro-climate simulations, highlights the performance evaluation of using cool building envelope materials, points out the research gaps, and proposes future research opportunities.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 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

Citations98
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuildingsSame topicUrban Heat Island MitigationFrench-language works237,207