MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2590050017 · doi:10.1680/jenes.16.00017

Flood hazard mapping for the gonbad chi region, Iran

2017· article· en· W2590050017 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mehdi Sepehri, Alireza Ildoromi, Hossein Malekinezhad, Seyed Zeynalabedin Hosseini, Ali Talebi, Saba Goodarzi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering and Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZoningTopographic Wetness IndexFlood mythEnvironmental scienceNatural hazardGeographic information systemDrainageHydrology (agriculture)HazardLand coverWater resource managementRouting (electronic design automation)100-year floodFloodplainLand useGeographyDigital elevation modelCartographyGeologyComputer scienceCivil engineeringRemote sensingMeteorologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flood hazard (FH) can be considered as one of the most serious threats mainly in areas and countries where other natural hazards hardly occur. This paper presents a simple approach to urban FH assessment in regions where the primary data are scarce. The objective of this study is to develop a geographic information system-aided urban FH zoning of the study area (in Iran), by applying multicriteria decision analysis and fuzzy analysis. In this process, the research methodology focused on the analysis of the variables controlling water routing. The model incorporated four parameters: distance to the drainage channels, topography (topographic wetness index), infiltration and cover type. The results demonstrated that most floods occur near the discharge channels and in the lower parts of the study area.

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 score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Engineering and ScienceSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207