MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588761350 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2016-0178

Managing rockfall risk through baseline monitoring of precursors using a terrestrial laser scanner

2017· article· en· W2588761350 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Ryan Kromer, Matt Lato, D. Jean Hutchinson, Dave Gauthier, Tom Edwards

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsCanadian Pacific Railway (Canada)BGC Engineering (Canada)Queen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaQueen's UniversityTransport Canada
KeywordsRockfallBaseline (sea)HazardKinematicsHazard analysisGeologyRisk assessmentRisk managementComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Geotechnical engineeringLandslideEngineeringComputer securityReliability engineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rockfalls represent significant risks to safe and efficient use of transportation corridors. In this paper, we address the management of rockfall risk through baseline remote monitoring of susceptible slopes (every 2–4 months) along a transportation corridor along the Fraser River valley in western Canada using a terrestrial laser scanner and supporting remote sensing technologies. This includes identifying potential rockfall source zones based on incipient signs of failure, tracking kinematics in three dimensions to better understand the mechanism of failure, estimating potential failure volumes based on bounding joint structure, and transmitting this information to the railway operator for an assessment of risk. We demonstrate our approach for one case along the line where we identified several potential failures ranging in volume from 48 to 4200 m3. Our projections of the location of failures were successful, in that volume projections were within 10%–55%, and the anticipated kinematics and failure mechanism were consistent with the assessment of post-failure rockfall scar geometries. Accurate volume and kinematics estimates are important for the assessment of hazard and risk as well as the planning of risk mitigation options. In general, this approach can be used to better manage risk from rockfall hazard in communities, transportation corridors, or other infrastructure.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.256
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 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

Citations57
Published2017
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207