MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2757223242 · doi:10.2495/sdp-v13-n3-418-424

Mobile augmented reality for flood events management

2018· article· en· W2757223242 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Domenica Mirauda, Ugo Erra, Roberto Agatiello, Marco Cerverizzo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundRegione Basilicata
KeywordsAugmented realityFlood mythEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementGeographyHuman–computer interactionArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The frequency of flood events worldwide has increased significantly over the past decades, and with it so has the need to employ information technologies able to help mobile workforces, both technicians and volunteers, during surveys in the emergency phases. In view of this, a client-server framework for the development of a mobile application that uses Augmented Reality (AR) was implemented. This platform, which increases visual perception of the real world merging additional information with the natural scene in real time, allows mobile workforces to more easily reach the most critical areas subject to flooding and rapidly make a decision on the level of flood protection. The performance of the prototype was evaluated on the Bradano river, located in the south-eastern Basilicata region (Italy), both in a real case study and in a simulated one. The obtained results show how the application represents an innovative tool compared to the existing ones, being it able to show, timely and continuously up-to-date, augmented information on various vulnerability scenarios during the emergency phases, helping both technical and non-technical operators to quickly intervene, containing or preventing secondary disasters, thus reducing deaths and injuries, and limiting the resulting economic losses and social disruption.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207