{"id":"W1972490689","doi":"10.1007/s11069-011-0082-4","title":"Buildings’ seismic vulnerability assessment methods: a comparative study","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Natural Hazards","topic":"Seismic Performance and Analysis","field":"Engineering","cited_by":80,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"ca_institutions":"University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus; University of British Columbia","funders":"Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada; Federal Emergency Management Agency","keywords":"Vulnerability (computing); Vulnerability assessment; Risk assessment; Analytic hierarchy process; Seismic risk; Seismic hazard; Weighting; Computer science; Natural hazard; Risk analysis (engineering); Hazard; Civil engineering; Construction engineering; Engineering; Operations research; Geography; Computer security","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007214011,0.0006291452,0.0005562307,0.007489902,0.0006556222,0.00131045,0.0008470733,0.0007125367,0.003516171],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01945806,0.0003414876,0.000904967,0.004337917,0.0005696369,0.002188127,0.001190196,0.0003672409,0.0006198602],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001244097,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005893913,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004152795,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00960923,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9951593,0.002712817,0.0002579224,0.0001950174,0.00150212,0.0001728108],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9805817,0.01418406,0.0009795843,0.0007679088,0.00326264,0.0002241036],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.002032693,0.00064554,0.3416776,0.001034362,0.001177803,0.0003460521,0.008328561,0.06345836,0.005319086,0.01078941,0.002253367,0.5629371],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00009838378,0.002165944,0.7334106,0.0004088346,0.0009445008,0.001368104,0.01311421,0.2187624,0.006964807,0.01065613,0.01187018,0.0002359411],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9342504,0.002827122,0.03350749,0.0002988329,0.00003554349,0.00008829071,0.0005991562,0.00009541496,0.02829777],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9890538,0.0008568673,0.00865161,0.00001679759,0.00001785173,0.00003053054,0.0002064162,0.00002317402,0.001143007],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.007489902,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.0381518,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.02920464696676425,"score_gpt":0.3792945754263248,"score_spread":0.3500899284595606,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}