Wind-comfort assessment in cities undergoing densification with high-rise buildings remediated by urban trees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As cities are densified, the presence of high-rise buildings can deteriorate wind-comfort conditions in urban neighborhoods with low-rise buildings. The present study aims to determine critical heights above which the pedestrian wind comfort deteriorates. Wind-flow patterns around high-rise buildings are investigated in different idealized configurations based on a systematic parametric study using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations. The impact of trees around high-rise buildings is quantified as a potential measure to reduce wind speed. As a further step, amplification factors obtained from CFD simulations are combined with available city-wide statistical data to obtain wind-comfort prediction maps. The results show that pedestrian wind comfort can worsen severely with a high-rise building exceeding two times the height of surrounding buildings. Above four times the height, any arrangement of surrounding buildings yields similar conditions in areas in close proximity to the high-rise building. However, the arrangement of buildings defines the overall wind-flow pattern. In staggered arrangement, in case of very tall buildings, critical corner streams are observed around neighboring buildings downstream. Large trees can reduce average wind speed, but they have only limited impact on the accelerated flow around the corners due to downflow from the high-rise building.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".