MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142438916 · doi:10.1109/systems.2008.4519053

An Ontological Approach to Conceptual Modeling of Disaster Management

2008· article· en· W2142438916 on OpenAlexafffund
Mandana Sotoodeh, Philippe Kruchten

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsComputer scienceAbstractionDomain (mathematical analysis)OntologyField (mathematics)GranularityConceptual modelEmergency managementVisualizationInformation systemDomain modelData scienceConceptual frameworkKnowledge managementDomain knowledgeData miningDatabaseEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Disaster management increasingly depends on various information systems, such as modeling and simulation systems or visualization and geographical information systems, to support decision makers at various stages of a disaster. The conceptual modeling of the domain for such systems is challenging, especially for IT developers new to the field. In this paper we present three ontologies that reflect three different views to a sub domain of disaster management at different levels of granularity. We compare the ontologies and discuss how a high-level model can separate concerns of various stakeholders into logical layers of abstraction, facilitate understanding of the domain, and inform development of various application 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.012
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations13
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicService-Oriented Architecture and Web ServicesFrench-language works237,207