How to Improve Fault Tolerance in Disaster Predictions: A Case Study about Flash Floods Using IoT, ML and Real Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rise in the number and intensity of natural disasters is a serious problem that affects the whole world. The consequences of these disasters are significantly worse when they occur in urban districts because of the casualties and extent of the damage to goods and property that is caused. Until now feasible methods of dealing with this have included the use of wireless sensor networks (WSNs) for data collection and machine-learning (ML) techniques for forecasting natural disasters. However, there have recently been some promising new innovations in technology which have supplemented the task of monitoring the environment and carrying out the forecasting. One of these schemes involves adopting IP-based (Internet Protocol) sensor networks, by using emerging patterns for IoT. In light of this, in this study, an attempt has been made to set out and describe the results achieved by SENDI (System for dEtecting and forecasting Natural Disasters based on IoT). SENDI is a fault-tolerant system based on IoT, ML and WSN for the detection and forecasting of natural disasters and the issuing of alerts. The system was modeled by means of ns-3 and data collected by a real-world WSN installed in the town of São Carlos - Brazil, which carries out the data collection from rivers in the region. The fault-tolerance is embedded in the system by anticipating the risk of communication breakdowns and the destruction of the nodes during disasters. It operates by adding intelligence to the nodes to carry out the data distribution and forecasting, even in extreme situations. A case study is also included for flash flood forecasting and this makes use of the ns-3 SENDI model and data collected by WSN.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".