MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009832294 · doi:10.1080/07011784.2014.881058

A GIS-supported fuzzy-set approach for flood risk assessment

2014· article· en· W2009832294 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Rifaat Abdalla, Yasir Ali Elawad, Zhi Chen, Sang Soo Han, Rui Xia

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityGovernment of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFlood mythGeographic information systemFlood risk assessmentDigital elevation modelFuzzy logicRisk assessmentFuzzy setRisk analysis (engineering)100-year floodComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceData miningHydrology (agriculture)Water resource managementCivil engineeringGeographyGeologyEngineeringRemote sensingGeotechnical engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents a geographic information system (GIS)-supported three-dimensional fuzzy risk assessment approach (3D GIS-FRA) for flood risk assessment that is based on the development of a fuzzy-set risk model, 3D GIS mapping, and a hydro-statistical simulation. Using GIS and a digital elevation model (DEM), urban settings under different levels of flood risk are visualized and hydraulic simulations conducted for various river flow scenarios to determine the flow rates for specified risk levels. Then, a statistical analysis is carried out using historical records to establish a set of risk criteria that consider critical factors that affect the peak flow rate. Finally, the developed fuzzy-set risk model is applied to examine the flood risks using the outputs from the hydraulic models and statistical analysis. The developed method is applied to a section of the Red River in Southern Manitoba, Canada. The 3D GIS-FRA results indicate that there is a possibility of having a highly risky situation for the upper-bound extreme condition for the study area, although only limited impacts are expected for a 25-year flood. For the 75-year flood scenario, the overall flood risk level is high for the whole area. The results indicate that the developed risk analysis system is useful for systematically quantifying the flood risks and the related system uncertainties.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.202 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations17
Published2014
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriquesSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207