A Data-Driven Decision-Making Tool for Prioritizing Resilience Strategies in Cold-Climate Urban Neighborhoods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cold-climate urban neighborhoods face mounting energy and thermal risks from extreme weather and power outages, creating trade-offs between different resilience capacities and objectives. This study develops a scalable, data-driven decision-making tool to support early-stage prioritization of resilience strategies at both the building component and neighborhood levels. A database of 48 active and passive strategies was systematically linked to 14 resilience objectives, reflecting energy- and thermally oriented capacities. Each strategy–objective pair was qualitatively assessed through a literature review and translated into probability distributions. Monte Carlo simulations (10,000 iterations) were performed to generate possible outcomes and several scores were calculated. Comparative scenario analysis—spanning holistic, short-term, long-term, energy-oriented, and thermally oriented perspectives—highlighted distinct adoption patterns. Active energy strategies, such as ESS, decentralized RES, microgrids, and CHP, consistently achieved the highest adoption (A) scores across levels and scenarios. Several passive measures, including green roofs, natural ventilation with passive heat recovery, and responsive glazing, also demonstrated strong multi-objective performance and outage resilience. A case study application integrated stakeholder-specific objective weightings, revealing convergent strategies suitable for immediate adoption and divergent ones requiring negotiation. This tool provides an adaptable probabilistic foundation for evaluating resilience strategies under uncertainty.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".