MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2530894115

Resilience assessment in geotechnical engineering

2016· dissertation· en· W2530894115 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mina Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResilience (materials science)Geotechnical engineeringGeotechnical investigationEngineeringGeologyCivil engineeringForensic engineeringMaterials science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Impacts of inevitable disasters and climate change have been major concerns for the safety and sustainability of communities in the recent past. In an effort to reduce these impacts, development of resilience in civil infrastructures is becoming crucial. Conceptually, resilience is the ability to absorb, recover from, and adapt to shocks or changing conditions. The current practice for infrastructure asset management needs to incorporate this concept of resilience in order to reduce or prevent the detrimental consequences not only to the physical infrastructure systems, but also to communities and other systems vital for fulfilling human needs. For example, consequences can include environmental impacts caused by an incident and rehabilitation construction activities, increased costs for the asset management, and degradation in the quality of life. Therefore, resilience thinking needs to be practiced for designing and managing civil infrastructure systems so that they are resilient to external stresses such as climate change and natural disasters. Despite the awareness that resilience can be a key to resolve the difficulties with extreme events and climate change and that geotechnical assets serve as crucial components in critical infrastructure systems, research in the resilience of geotechnical assets is lacking. To put resilience thinking into practical applications in geotechnical engineering, a quantitative-based framework suitable and applicable for geotechnical assets is necessary. 
\n 
\nA quantitative resilience assessment framework applicable for geotechnical assets is proposed in this thesis. Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework is adopted in developing the framework. It quantifies the impacts of damaged geotechnical assets to the relevant civil infrastructure network subjected to hazard scenarios. It also evaluates which strategic planning for mitigation and rehabilitation against the hazards is the most effective way for improving the resilience of the geotechnical assets. Metrics which reflect robustness, rapidity, redundancy, and resourcefulness aspects of resilience are developed for the evaluation. Environmental, economic, and social impacts are also concurrently considered to understand the trade-offs between the response strategies and their implementation consequences. The proposed framework is demonstrated using a case study on road embankments in a transportation network connecting London and Toronto in the province of Ontario.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207