Evaluation and Optimization Design for Microclimate Comfort of Traditional Village Squares Based on Extension Correlation Function
Table 11
Fitness between simulation and measured results at each measuring point of the square.
Measuring point 1
Measuring point 2
Measuring point 3
Measuring point 4
Wind velocity (m/s)
Temperature (°C)
Wind velocity (m/s)
Temperature (°C)
Node name
Wind velocity (m/s)
Temperature (°C)
Wind velocity (m/s)
Equation
y = a + bx
y = a + bx
y = a + bx
y = a + bx
y = a + bx
y = a + bx
y = a + bx
y = a + bx
Weight
Unweighted
Unweighted
Unweighted
Unweighted
Unweighted
Unweighted
Unweighted
Unweighted
Intercept
0.02563 ± 0.17626
0.53378 ± 0.62552
−0.05218 ± 0.04303
−0.24668 ± 0.58233
−0.11303 ± 0.14426
−0.45755 ± 0.52582
−0.12729 ± 0.05036
0.82598 ± 0.50074
Slope
0.92431 ± 0.2125
0.83446 ± 0.14195
0.94867 ± 0.05964
0.99711 ± 0.13882
1.21212 ± 0.31498
1.07344 ± 0.10699
1.08902 ± 0.06468
0.76399 ± 0.11532
Residual sum of squares
0.04268
0.09798
0.00221
0.10468
0.00761
0.06467
0.00265
0.06124
Pearson’s R
0.87134
0.92307
0.98835
0.94647
0.8436
0.97147
0.98958
0.93794
R2 (COD)
0.75923
0.85206
0.97684
0.89581
0.71166
0.94374
0.97927
0.87974
Adjusted R2
0.71911
0.8274
0.97298
0.87845
0.66361
0.93437
0.97582
0.8597
The simulated results were fitted against the measured results through the paired sample t-test. The results show that the R2 at any measuring point was greater than 0.5, a sign of strong correlation. There is no significant difference between the two sets of results (), i.e., the simulation is sufficiently accurate (Tables 10 and 11).
