MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408519911 · doi:10.1016/j.dte.2025.100040

A comprehensive review of Digital Twin technologies in smart cities

2025· review· en· W4408519911 on OpenAlexafffund
Annysha Huzzat, Alagan Anpalagan, Ahmed Shaharyar Khwaja, Isaac Woungang, Ali Alnoman, Anju S. Pillai

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital engineering. · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Cities and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceData science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As urbanization accelerates globally, the need for smarter, more sustainable cities has become imperative. This review article delves into the realm of Digital Twin (DT) technologies and their role in shaping the future of urban development. By exploring the convergence of DT technologies and smart cities, this article offers a comprehensive analysis of how these technologies are driving the Industry 4.0 (I4.0) revolution. Through an extensive literature review, we examine the pivotal role of DT technologies in diverse domains such as healthcare, wellness, security, safety, transportation, energy, mobility, and communications. Furthermore, the review explores the enabling technologies behind DTs, including Internet of Things (IoT)-based, Machine Learning (ML)-based, Cyber–physical Systems (CPSs)-based, and blockchain technology-based, to name a few. Practical applications of DT technologies are also examined through reviews of case studies across transport, water management and automotive technology, highlighting their transformative impact on smart city development. Lastly, this article addresses key DT research challenges and outlines future directions to unlock the full potential of DT technologies in building safe and sustainable cities. • Role of Digital Twins in smart city development is reviewed. • Enabling Digital Twin technologies in smart cities are presented. • Technologies include Machine Learning, IoT, Cyber–physical Systems, blockchain. • Digital Twin applications in smart cities across multiple domains are discussed. • Digital Twins case studies on transport, water and driving are reviewed.

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)0.002
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations34
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital engineering.Same topicSmart Cities and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207