MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2077426747 · doi:10.1139/l01-072

Risk analysis in environmental systems

2002· article· en· W2077426747 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elhadi Shakshuki, K. Ponnambalam, Tassew Wodaj

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoment (physics)Computer scienceReliability (semiconductor)Probabilistic logicUncertainty analysisAutomationRisk analysis (engineering)Key (lock)Task (project management)Mathematical optimizationReliability engineeringData miningMathematicsEngineeringSimulationArtificial intelligenceSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uncertainty is an inherent feature of environmental systems, which makes probabilistic models important. Environmental risk assessment is an important but time consuming task. For large-scale systems, use of linear systems with uncertainty information on parameters and inputs is one of the few possible methods to assess risk. To estimate risk, it is necessary to have at least the first two moments of output variables. This paper describes an efficient method developed for second-moment analysis of linear systems with uncertain coefficients. The main objective is to provide the means and the variances of the output and to provide efficient formulation and automation of the moment equations. This method is demonstrated in two real-world applications of environmental modeling.Key words: uncertainty, second-moment methods, risk analysis, reliability, linear systems.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering→Same topicRisk and Safety Analysis→French-language works237,207→