Mapping the Influence of Olympic Games’ Urban Planning on the Land Surface Temperatures: An Estimation Using Landsat Series and Google Earth Engine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Olympic Games are a sporting event and a catalyst for urban development in their host city. In this study, we utilized remote sensing and GIS techniques to examine the impact of the Olympic infrastructure on the surface temperature of urban areas. Using Landsat Series Collection 2 Tier 1 Level 2 data and cloud computing provided by Google Earth Engine (GEE), this study examines the effects of various forms of Olympic Games facility urban planning in different historical moments and location typologies, as follows: monocentric, polycentric, peripheric and clustered Olympic ring. The GEE code applies to the Olympic Games that occurred from Paris 2024 to Montreal 1976. However, this paper focuses specifically on the representative cases of Paris 2024, Tokyo 2020, Rio 2016, Beijing 2008, Sydney 2000, Barcelona 1992, Seoul 1988, and Montreal 1976. The study is not only concerned with obtaining absolute land surface temperatures (LST), but rather the relative influence of mega-event infrastructures on mitigating or increasing the urban heat. As such, the locally normalized land surface temperature (NLST) was utilized for this purpose. In some cities (Paris, Tokyo, Beijing, and Barcelona), it has been determined that Olympic planning has resulted in the development of green spaces, creating “green spots” that contribute to lower-than-average temperatures. However, it should be noted that there is a significant variation in temperature within intensely built-up areas, such as Olympic villages and the surrounding areas of the Olympic stadium, which can become “hotspots.” Therefore, it is important to acknowledge that different planning typologies of Olympic infrastructure can have varying impacts on city heat islands, with the polycentric and clustered Olympic ring typologies displaying a mitigating effect. This research contributes to a cloud computing method that can be updated for future Olympic Games or adapted for other mega-events and utilizes a widely available remote sensing data source to study a specific urban planning context.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".