MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1498727558 · doi:10.1111/jfr3.12168

Urban flooding and ground‐related homes in Canada: an overview

2015· article· en· W1498727558 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dan Sandink

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Flood Risk Management · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlood mythFlooding (psychology)StormwaterEnvironmental planningFlood mitigationBusinessDamagesFlood insuranceUrban planningIncentiveEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceGeographyCivil engineeringSurface runoffEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Urban flooding associated with extreme precipitation is a significant cause of disaster damages for municipalities, homeowners and insurers in Canada. Several approaches have been applied to reduce urban flood risk at the municipal and homeowner scales, including addressing inflow/infiltration in wastewater systems, accommodating extreme stormwater flows in subdivision design and protecting individual homes from flooding. Insurers have also engaged in managing urban flood risk through interactions with individual policyholders and initiatives aimed at better understanding urban flood risk and risk mitigation options. Requiring mitigation measures at the time of the construction of homes, improving insurance data, application of incentives for appropriate private side retrofits, and improved collaboration between insurers and municipalities for identification of urban flood risk areas provide additional opportunities for urban flood risk reduction. Further, senior levels of governments should support inflow/infiltration reduction and application of climate change information to improve the planning and design of municipal infrastructure.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.015
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Flood Risk ManagementSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207