MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022201065 · doi:10.1002/met.198

Public perception of and response to severe weather warnings in Nova Scotia, Canada

2010· article· en· W2022201065 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amber Silver, Catherine Conrad

Bibliographic record

VenueMeteorological Applications · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaVulnerability (computing)Warning systemNova (rocket)Social vulnerabilityGeographyPerceptionSocial mediaPolitical sciencePsychologyComputer scienceAeronauticsEngineeringComputer securityPsychological interventionTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Hurricane Juan, which struck Atlantic Canada on 29 September, 2003, revealed the full extent of public vulnerability to severe weather events in Nova Scotia. In this study, 130 people were interviewed via a systematic sampling technique to examine their perception of severe weather warnings, and to determine what actions (if any) they are most likely to take when a warning has been posted. It was found that different target groups (e.g. the elderly, students) use different modes of media to obtain their severe weather information. It is recommended that forecast centres tailor their advisories for specific media sources so as best to reach various target groups. It was also found that respondents are generally satisfied with the weather warnings they receive, but there is a lack of awareness of the existence and extent of public vulnerability in Nova Scotia. The development of a comprehensive education campaign which will outline various facets of social vulnerability, while also offering recommendations on how best to lower existing social vulnerability, is critical. Copyright © 2010 Royal Meteorological Society

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)0.002
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations26
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeteorological ApplicationsSame topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207