Spatial Representation of Coastal Risk: A Fuzzy Approach to Deal with Uncertainty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spatial information for coastal risk assessment is inherently uncertain. This uncertainty may be due to different spatial and temporal components of geospatial data and to their semantics. The spatial uncertainty can be expressed either quantitatively or qualitatively. Spatial uncertainty in coastal risk assessment itself arises from poor spatial representation of risk zones. Indeed, coastal risk is inherently a dynamic, complex, scale-dependent, and vague, phenomenon in concept. In addition, representing the associated zones with polygons having well-defined boundaries does not provide a realistic method for efficient and accurate representing of the risk. This paper proposes a conceptual framework, based on fuzzy set theory, to deal with the problems of ill-defined risk zone boundaries and the inherent uncertainty issues. To do so, the nature and level of uncertainty, as well as the way to model it are characterized. Then, a fuzzy representation method is developed where the membership functions are derived based on expert-knowledge. The proposed approach is then applied in the Perce region (Eastern Quebec, Canada) and results are presented and discussed.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".