MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W281895750 · doi:10.21236/ada575618

Development of Earthquake Emergency Response Plan for Tribhuvan International Airport, Kathmandu, Nepal

2013· report· en· W281895750 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bishnu Pandey, Carlos E. Ventura, Terry Moser

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmergency responsePlan (archaeology)Emergency managementInternational airportGeographyEnvironmental planningEconomic growthMedical emergencyCartographyMedicineArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract : The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) awarded in April 2012 a research and development project to The University of British Columbia (UBC) to develop a methodology for the Earthquake Emergency Response Plan of the Tribhuvan International Airport in Kathmandu, Nepal. A team of professionals from UBC, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) worked together to implement the project plan. The team project developed a disaster response plan (DRP) for TIA that focuses on earthquake hazard. The project team also delivered a responsibility synchronization matrix and TIADRP action checklists for two key positions: the Director of Civil Aviation Authority of Nepal (CAAN) and the General Manager of TIA Civil Aviation Office (CAO). Appendices to this report include resource documents containing guidelines for post-earthquake assessment of airfield for damage and throughput capacity, damage assessment of airport structures, utilities and operational/functional components (OFCs) and a list of rapid repair kit items. A list of recommendations for risk mitigation and effective recovery of the airport were also included based on need. The development of the plan built upon previous work already performed by CAAN, TIA and others. In developing the response plan the project team used stakeholders input as the primary basis. Secondary data was also used wherever available and was taken mostly from published reports and documents. For developing the resource documents, the procedures for post-earthquake rapid damage assessment of airport buildings, utilities and other OFC, and procedures for rapid repair of airfield pavement, guidelines and other literature from the United States, Canada, and Japan etc. were adapted for Nepalese context.

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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.570
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207