Landslide hazard assessment of the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake: a case study in Beichuan area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Wenchuan earthquake (magnitude Ms = 8.0) of 12 May 2008 triggered widespread and large-scale landslides over an area of about 50 000 km2. A study was undertaken to determine the primary factors associated with seismic landslide occurrence. An index-based approach used to assess earthquake-triggered landslide hazard in the central part of the Wenchuan earthquake area affected is described. Slope gradient, relief amplitude, lithology, bedding–slope relations, fault proximity, stream proximity, and antecedent rainfall are recognized as factors that may have had an important influence on landslide occurrence. The assessment of the influence of each of these factors is presented through use of a series of maps showing areas of low, moderate, high, and very high landslide hazard. Areas identified as having “very high and high landslide hazard” were located along the earthquake-source fault and along both banks of the Jian River. The role of rainfall is very significant for future landslide occurrence in the earthquake area. The results of this study will assist decision makers in the selection of safe sites during the reconstruction process. The maps can also be used for landslide risk management in the study area.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".