MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092643274 · doi:10.1109/tsmc.2014.2336831

A Socio-Physical Approach to Systemic Risk Reduction in Emergency Response and Preparedness

2014· article· en· W2092643274 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Systems · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreparednessIdentification (biology)Risk analysis (engineering)Reduction (mathematics)Isolation (microbiology)Emergency responseSystemic riskComputer scienceEmergency managementPsychologyMedicineMedical emergencyMathematicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a socio-physical approach that considers jointly the interaction and integration of the social and physical views of a system to improve emergency response and preparedness. This is accomplished through a reduction of systemic risk, which refers to a risk that could be greater than the sum of the risks of the individual system constituents. Using network analysis, it is shown that the explicit socio-physical approach yields meaningful qualitative and quantitative differences when compared with approaches that focus on the social and physical views in isolation. The benefits of this proposed approach are illustrated on a case study using clustering analysis and a proof-of-concept simulation. This new approach leads to systemic risk reduction by enabling a more informed and coordinated response strategy following an incident and a better identification of possible consequences and preparation strategies prior to an incident.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.273 · 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