MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Use of Flood, Loss, and Evacuation Models to Assess Exposure and Improve a Community Tsunami Response Plan: Vancouver Island

2011· article· en· W2125382225 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNatural Hazards Review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlood mythHazardPopulationRisk assessmentEmergency managementPoison controlEmergency responseEnvironmental scienceForensic engineeringGeographyEngineeringEnvironmental healthMedical emergencyMedicineComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Communities developing plans for response to tsunami require site-specific estimates of the hazard, elements at risk, and potential losses, and an assessment of the effectiveness of mitigations and protective actions. Citizens want to know whether they can reach safe havens in sufficient time and whether recommended safe haven locations can offer sufficient protection. This paper investigates how flood, loss, and evacuation predictive models can be used to develop baseline estimates of potential losses without mitigations in place, with the goal of helping communities assess and improve response plans. A case study is presented for the District of Ucluelet, British Columbia, which is susceptible to the Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) earthquake and tsunami hazard. Approximately 58% of the community’s buildings and key elements of the critical infrastructure are in a tsunami hazard zone. Depending upon the time of day and year, between one-half and two-thirds of the resident and tourist population are at risk, and depending on the evacuation strategy, between one-fifth and one-third of the population-at-risk could be lost. These mortality rates are comparable to observed rates for a rapid-onset, high-intensity tsunami. Alternative emergency response plans are simulated and assessed for their effectiveness in terms of the potential for loss reduction and for increases in evacuation rates. The importance of self-activation and rapid protective action is confirmed, and pedestrian-based evacuation to an expanded set of proximal safe havens is recommended. Tourists form a large proportion of the population-at-risk during high season and could experience significant proportional losses. Future research is needed to assess the community’s understanding of tsunami risk and whether community preparedness has actually improved. This study also confirms the need for broader initiatives to estimate populations at risk, to conduct evacuation modeling studies, and to assess whether evacuation on foot, in vehicles, or in combination is most effective.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.206 · 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