MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2256842171 · doi:10.2166/wcc.2015.093

Adaptation tipping points and opportunities for urban flood risk management

2015· article· en· W2256842171 on OpenAlexaff
Nadia Koukoui, Berry Gersonius, P.P. Schot, Sebastiaan van Herk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water and Climate Change · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainability and Climate Change Governance
Canadian institutionsVictoria Park
FundersInterreg
KeywordsFlood mythClimate changeAdaptation (eye)Environmental resource managementCoping (psychology)Tipping point (physics)Environmental planningRisk managementBusinessInvestment (military)Risk analysis (engineering)Flood risk managementNatural resource economicsEnvironmental scienceEconomicsGeographyEngineeringFinanceEcologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of climate change are expected to increase the frequency and magnitude of floods, droughts and heat waves. An emerging method termed adaptation tipping point – opportunity (ATP-O) assesses a system's climate-incurred tipping points and uses opportunities arising from urban developments to introduce adaptation strategies while reducing investment costs. The objective of this research was to apply the ATP-O method to the city of Dordrecht in the Netherlands. The results show that the alternative adaptation strategy proposed (an overland drainage system) would be effective in coping with the effects of climate change where the current management strategy (disconnection of impervious surfaces from sewer systems) fails to do so. The ATP-O also proved helpful in identifying opportunities to adapt at lower costs. This research stimulated discussions between stakeholders on performance objectives, policy development, investment strategies, and flood risk management practices. The sensitivity analysis performed to support such discussion revealed that small variations in acceptability thresholds, associated with policy objectives, can have significant impact on ATP occurrence and timing.

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 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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.361
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.146 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water and Climate ChangeSame topicSustainability and Climate Change GovernanceFrench-language works237,207