Evaluation of the Traffic Impacts of Mass Evacuation of Halifax: Flood Risk and Dynamic Traffic Microsimulation Modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a comprehensive evaluation of traffic impacts of a mass evacuation of the Halifax Peninsula under several flooding scenarios. Flood extent and associated damages to the transport network are identified through digital elevation modeling that intersects with the Halifax stream and transport networks. The resulting flood scenarios inform a traffic microsimulation model that uses a dynamic traffic assignment-based microsimulation approach and simulates the evacuation of 34,808 evacuees estimated from the Halifax Regional Transport Network Model. The simulation results suggest that flooding of the links by 7.9 m flood reduces alternative evacuation routes by 31.2%. It takes 15 hours to evacuate 83% of evacuees while the remaining 17% are not accommodated in the network due to reduced network capacity. The number of vehicles in the network has peaked at 13,000 in this flooding scenario. An evaluation of network performance reveals a sustained congestion prevailing from 4 th to 7 th hour of the evacuation. The novelty of this study is that it develops a comprehensive tool of flood risk and dynamic traffic microsimulation modeling to offer an in-depth evaluation of potential impacts during evacuation. The results will help emergency professionals in evacuation planning and making emergency decisions.
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 | 0.010 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".