DRDC Support to Emergency Management British Columbia's (EMBC) Hazard Risk Vulnerability Analysis (HRVA) and Critical Infrastructure (CI) Programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract : This paper presents the problem formulation and solution strategy component of the EMBC-DRDC collaborative project agreement for improving EMBC's Hazard Risk Vulnerability Analysis (HRVA) and Critical Infrastructure (CI) Assurance Programs. The methodology is described; the NATO Code of Best Practice for C2 Assessment and a soft operations research approach were applied, along with aspects of capability based planning, systems engineering, and risk management. Preliminary literature searches were performed and are documented here. Stakeholder groups are described and the questions used to elicit their perspectives on the programs and related issues are presented. The result of the analysis was the identification of program requirements, gaps, and proposed projects by DRDC to address aspects of the gaps. The proposed projects include adapting the Major Events Security Framework for use by EMBC, CI assessment tool development through pilot projects, and contracts for a community resilience framework and scenario mission to task templates, among several others.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".