Using clustering to understand intra-city warming in heatwaves: insights into Paris, Montreal, and Zurich
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We introduce a novel methodological advancement by clustering paired near-surface air temperature with the planetary boundary layer height to characterize intra-city clusters for analytics. To illustrate this approach, we analyze three heatwaves (HWs): the 2019 HW in Paris, the 2018 HW in Montreal, and the 2017 HW in Zurich. We assess cluster-based characteristics before, during, and after heatwave events. While the urban clusters identified by this clustering align well with built-up areas obtained from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) land cover data, additional local hot spots spanning several kilometers can also be recognized, extending outside the built-up areas. Using the objective hysteresis model, we further determine the overall strength coefficient of the hysteresis loop between ground storage flux and all-wave downward radiative flux, ranging from 0.414 to 0.457 for urban clusters and from 0.126 to 0.157 for rural clusters during the heatwave periods. Across all cities, we observe a consistent refueling-restoration mode in the cumulative ground heat flux as the heatwaves progress. Future developments of this proposed two-component clustering approach, with the integration of more influential physics and advances in spatial and temporal resolutions, will offer a more comprehensive characterization of cities for urban climate analytics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".