MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980304384 · doi:10.1080/19475705.2012.746243

Integration of multicriteria evaluation and cellular automata methods for landslide simulation modelling

2013· article· en· W1980304384 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Terence Lai, Suzana Dragićević, Margaret Schmidt

Bibliographic record

VenueGeomatics Natural Hazards and Risk · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaShanghai Ocean University
KeywordsLandslideCellular automatonDigital elevation modelComputer scienceGeographic information systemElevation (ballistics)Flooding (psychology)GeologyNatural hazardRepresentation (politics)Stream powerCivil engineeringData miningGeotechnical engineeringRemote sensingMeteorologyGeographyGeomorphologyAlgorithmEngineeringErosionStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The representation and modelling of physical and natural systems are mostly implemented using partial differential equations. Physical processes such as flooding, tsunamis, avalanches, earthquakes and landslides undeniably possess complex systems behaviour. Modelling such dynamic phenomena can be adequately addressed by using geocomplexity – complex systems theory and cellular automata (CA). This study develops a novel approach that couples geographic information systems (GIS), multicriteria evaluation (MCE) and CA to simulate shallow landslide flows occurring in urban areas. The landslide susceptibility map produced from the MCE model was used as one input for the CA model. The high-resolution digital elevation model (DEM) is used to calculate topographic variables such as slope gradient, aspect gradient, stream power index, topographic wetness index, and flow direction which were all used in model design. The developed MCE-CA simulation model was tested on historical landslide data in Metro Vancouver, Canada. The spatial extents of the landslide simulations were compared with actual data to test the model simulation outcomes. The developed model has a potential to become useful tool that can aid urban planners and emergency workers in identifying and mitigating threats due to landslides.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations49
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeomatics Natural Hazards and RiskSame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207