## 3 Results
### Comparison of the Results Given by the Comfort Model with the Survey Responses  
A comparison between the objective thermal sensations, calculated by the COMFA comfort model, and the subjective thermal sensations, collected during the survey campaign, is shown in Figure 18 for the four selected days on the three representative clusters. All the squares (whether they are green, yellow, or red) correspond to zones where the objective thermal sensations are identical to subjective thermal sensations. The results show that the objective model does not always coincide with people's subjective feelings. 65% of the model's results correctly predict how people actually feel. Furthermore, the model tends to overestimate people's feelings. When the results do not match, more than 45% of the model's predictions are associated with conditions worse than what people experience in warm climates such as Seville. One of the explanations could be the factor of acclimatization in these cities where people are used to the heat all during the year. In order to better understand the results of the comparison, Figure 19 shows the weight of each of the factors affecting thermal comfort for the study period differentiating between the three clusters and the four representative days. These factors are the state of the person (metabolism, transpiration, and respiration) (MP), direct radiation (DR), diffuse radiation (dR), and reflected radiation (RR), as well as convective exchange with the air (C) and radiant exchange with the environment (LR). Positive values refer to the inputs received by the person, while negative values refer to the heat dissipation from the body due to the climatic conditions at that time. Figure 17: Thermal load calculated by the COMFA model. When analyzing the comparison of thermal sensations for the sun cluster, the objective model estimated all the results as \"very hot,\" with values above 150 W/m\({}^{2}\) and in the order of 300 W/m\({}^{2}\). However, among the subjective responses in the sun cluster, although some are \"very hot,\" quite a lot of the others are just \"hot.\" This means that various people, even with incident radiation values in the order of 500-600 W/m\({}^{2}\) and air temperatures above 25 \({}^{\circ}\)C, do not find the space too hot. It is clear that for this cluster over the four days, the influence of radiation as well as the surface temperatures are at positive values, providing heat to the occupant. However, the convective exchange with the air reduces the heat load of the user. Thus, while the radiation strongly influences the results of the objective model, the subjective results show how the level of uncomfortable sensation is lower than the objective estimation. It is thanks to the temperature of the air. For the shadow cluster, where there is no radiation--represented by a zero weight of this factor on comfort (see Figure 19), 92% of the subjective responses match the objective responses. This high percentage is due to the direct link between the feeling of comfort and the air temperature in this case, where without radiation, the convective exchange is the factor with the highest weight (see Figure 19). In this group, the occupants feel warm, except on the last day when the air temperature is lower, so they feel comfortable. Figure 19: Influence of the factors affecting human comfort on the objective thermal sensation calculated. Figure 18: Graph of comparison between the objective and subjective thermal sensations. The intermediate cluster has thermal loads between \"very hot\" and \"hot,\" never exceeding 200 W/m\({}^{2}\). The surface temperatures of the zones concerned are lower than those of the sun cluster, and the weight of the radiation received on human comfort is also reduced, thus leading to spaces less hot than in the sun cluster. On the other hand, the objective model again predicts more pessimistic results.