An Intelligent Decision Support System for Management of Floods
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Integrating human knowledge with modeling tools, an intelligent decision support system (DSS) is developed to assist decision makers during different phases of flood management. The DSS is developed as a virtual planning tool and can address both engineering and non-engineering issues related to flood management. Different models (hydrodynamic, forecasting, and economic) that are part of the DSS share data and communicate with each other by providing feedback. The DSS is able to assist in: selecting suitable flood damage reduction options (using an expert system approach); forecasting floods (using artificial neural networks approach); modeling the operation of flood control structures; and describing the impacts (area flooded and damage) of floods in time and space. The proposed DSS is implemented for the Red River Basin in Manitoba, Canada. The results from the test application of DSS for 1997 flood in the Red River Basin are very promising. The DSS is able to predict the peak flows with 2% error and reveals that with revised operating rules the contribution of Assiniboine River to the flooding of Winnipeg city can be significantly reduced. The decision support environment allows a number of “what-if” type questions to be asked and answered, thus, multiple decisions can be tried without having to deal with the real life consequences.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it