MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

7. THE FLOOD OF 1993

2016· book-chapter· en· W2477545845 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christine A. Klein, Sandra B. Zellmer

Bibliographic record

VenueNew York University Press eBooks · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlood mythTributaryGeographyNational weather serviceQuarter (Canadian coin)CensusSpring (device)ArchaeologyHydrology (agriculture)MeteorologyCartographyEngineeringPopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter focuses the flood of 1993 and the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The spring and summer of 1993 brought torrential rains to the Midwest, along with record-breaking river crests. By August, the upper Mississippi and its tributaries, including the Missouri River, flooded seventeen thousand square miles in nine states. According to the National Weather Service, the 1993 flood broke records for both intensity and duration throughout Missouri, Minnesota, Iowa, and Illinois. U.S. Geological Survey and the Army Corps of Engineers estimated that the flood caused forty-eight deaths and up to $20 billion in property damage. It also displaced about seventy-four thousand people. Many of the victims were uninsured. Although NFIP had been in place for a quarter century, up to 80 percent of eligible property owners had not taken advantage of the opportunity to protect themselves.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.014

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew York University Press eBooksSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207