MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1599041744

Child-centred disaster risk reduction in Australia : progress, gaps and opportunities

2014· article· en· W1599041744 on OpenAlexaff
Briony Towers, Katharine Haynes, Fiona Sewell, Heather Bailie, David Cross

Bibliographic record

VenueRMIT Research Repository (RMIT University Library) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisaster risk reductionProject commissioningResilience (materials science)Variety (cybernetics)PublishingRisk managementEmergency managementPsychological resilienceEnvironmental planningPolitical sciencePublic relationsEconomic growthBusinessGeographyPsychologyFinanceEconomicsComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary objective of child-centred disaster risk reduction (CC-DRR) is to strengthen children's skills so that they understand the risk of disasters in their communities and are able to play a role in reducing the risks and impacts of potential disasters. Historically, the approaches embodied by CC-DRR have remained on the margins of Australian disaster risk reduction (DRR) policy, research and practice. More recently CC-DRR has been recognised as a valuable component of disaster risk reduction frameworks at the local, regional and national levels and this is reflected in new initiatives in a variety of domains, including disaster resilience education, school emergency management, and community-based programming. This paper provides a progress report on some of these of these initiatives and identifies several gaps and opportunities that are still waiting to addressed. - See more at: https://ajem.infoservices.com.au/items/AJEM-29-01-09#sthash.KH2gPtig.dpuf

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations31
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRMIT Research Repository (RMIT University Library)Same topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207