MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2039045810 · doi:10.1109/waina.2014.143

Parallel Infrastructures and Systems for Near-Field Tsunami Detection and Impact Assessment

2014· article· en· W2039045810 on OpenAlexaff
Yağız Onat Yazır, Josh Erickson, Yvonne Coady

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLeverage (statistics)ScalabilityDistributed computingComputationField (mathematics)Emergency responseEvent (particle physics)Focus (optics)Real-time computingDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes our ongoing effort to develop an efficient and scalable infrastructure to model and simulate near-field tsunamis in order to develop site-specific impact scenarios (e.g. the expected effects of the tsunami on land). Our goal is to be able to leverage this infrastructure in order to provide the necessary information to assist emergency planning, notification and response programs. Our primary focus is to produce the scenario information quickly by efficiently utilizing the available hardware, providing as much lead-time as possible for the response systems. We have been able to show that a distributed computing approach allows for parallel computation of simulations, resulting in shorter times between the occurrence of an event and the simulated output. Included in this paper is our proposed computational model, a summary of our infrastructure and an evaluation of our proposed distributed framework.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicearthquake and tectonic studies→French-language works237,207→