MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810553315 · doi:10.4095/308352

Inventory models for regional scale natural hazards risk assessment

2018· report· en· W2810553315 on OpenAlexaffabout
S. K. Ploeger, Miho Sawada, Ahmad Abo El Ezz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability Analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale (ratio)Natural hazardEnvironmental scienceNatural (archaeology)GeographyCartographyMeteorologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This document presents the results of research efforts aimed to develop inventory models of the demography and general building stock for urban centers and rural communities across eastern Canada. The inventory models are intended for use in the rapid seismic risk assessment tool ER2 (for Rapid Risk Evaluation). Research and development of the inventory models were carried out jointly by the University of Ottawa and École de technologie supérieure (ETS) Montréal. These were part of the larger Prompt Evaluation of Seismic Risk project (PESR CSSP-2016-CP-2283), led by National Resources Canada (NRCan) for the Canadian Safety and Security Program (CSSP) managed by Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) Centre for Security Science (CSS) and Public Safety Canada. The ER2 tool informs the public safety community and emergency management decision makers with information on various aspects of seismic risk. It consists of two software components for two distinct types of use. The first focusses on near real-time risk analyses following a major earthquake event, while the second component supports various risk assessment initiatives for scenario-based risk analyses. The inventory models were developed across a study area extending from the Greater Toronto Area (Ontario) to Quebec City (Quebec). The study boundary encompasses approximately 123,455 km2, 6,398 census units (census tracts and dissemination areas) and over 4.2 million buildings. Detailed inventories for building types and occupancy classes were conducted for 12 municipalities ranging from rural communities to large urban centres in both Ontario and Quebec. Since these inventories cover only about 0.6% of the study area (km2) or 4.8% of the total number of buildings, a procedure had to be developed to extrapolate representative building information from the detailed inventories to be applied across the remaining census units in the study area. First, the procedure started with an estimation on the number of buildings for each census unit based on available geospatial datasets; demographic information was also collected. Second, each census unit was identified by an IoX class code that accounts its population (by size and as populated or non-populated), land use (as residential or commercial, and related densification) and average age (before or after 1960). All census units within the study area was represented in total by 45 different IoX classes. Third, the distribution of building characteristics within the detailed inventory were summarized by IoX code which provide a reasonable representation of the actual construction practices. Within the inventoried buildings, around 94% are residential buildings, 93% are wood constructions and around 74% were build after 1960. Distribution of building characteristics differ depending on the size of the community, its main land use and the average year of construction. In order to estimate the potential economic losses from earthquake scenarios, average square footage, and replacement and content values in dollar terms were associated for various occupancy classes in each default IoX class. To further estimate potential social losses (injuries, fatalities, shelter needs), demography distribution models were built considering three common times of the day: 2am (nighttime), 2pm (daytime) and 5pm (commuting time), accompanied with respective residential, working and commuting population estimations. A two-tiered approach was used to address population distributions. These tiers represent a 'rural' model where it is assumed that the 'workers' work within their census unit and the 'urban' model where it is assumed that most of the 'workers' commute to another census unit.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.277 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207