The spatial configuration of local climate zones reveals effects on wayfinding in human walking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The importance of easy wayfinding in complex urban settings has been recognized in spatial planning. Empirical measurement and explicit representation of wayfinding, however, have been limited in deciding spatial configurations. Our study proposed and tested an approach to improving wayfinding by incorporating spatial analysis of urban forms in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau Great Bay Area in China. Wayfinding was measured by an indicator of intelligibility using spatial design network analysis. Urban spatial configurations were quantified using landscape metrics to describe the spatial layouts of local climate zones (LCZs) as standardized urban forms. The statistical analysis demonstrated the significant associations between urban spatial configurations and wayfinding. These findings suggested, to improve wayfinding, 1) dispersing LCZ 1 (compact high-rise) and LCZ 2 (compact mid-rise) and 2) agglomerating LCZ 3 (compact low-rise), LCZ 5 (open mid-rise), LCZ 6 (open low-rise), and LCZ 9 (sparsely built). To our knowledge, this study is the first to incorporate the LCZ classification system into the wayfinding field, clearly providing empirically-supported solutions for dispersing and agglomerating spatial configurations. Our findings also provide insights for human-centered spatial planning by spatial co-development at local, urban, and regional levels.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".