MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901550046 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2017-0611

Building physically based models for assessing rainfall-induced shallow landslide hazard at catchment scale: case study of the Sorrento Peninsula (Italy)

2018· article· en· W2901550046 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Brunella Balzano, Alessandro Tarantino, Marco Valerio Nicotera, Giovanni Forte, Melania De Falco, Antonio Santo

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandslideGeologyScale (ratio)Natural hazardHazardGeotechnical engineeringHydrology (agriculture)Drainage basinEnvironmental scienceGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The assessment of rainfall-induced shallow landslide hazards at the catchment scale poses a significant challenge. Traditional empirical approaches for landslide hazard assessment often assume that conditions having caused failure in the past will not change in the future. This assumption may not hold in a climate change scenario. Physically based models (PBMs) therefore represent the natural approach to include changing climate effects. PBMs would in principle require the combination of a three-dimensional (3-D) mechanical and water-flow model. However, a full 3-D finite element model at the catchment scale, with relatively small elements required to capture the pore-water pressure gradients, would have a significant computational cost. For this reason, simplifications to the mechanical (i.e., infinite slope) and water-flow models (i.e., one-dimensional or hybrid 3-D) are introduced, often based on a priori assumptions and not corroborated by experimental evidence. The paper presents a methodology to build a PBM in a bottom-up fashion based on geological surveys and geotechnical investigation. The PBM is initially set as simple as possible and then moved to a higher level of complexity if the model is not capable of simulating past landslide events. The approach is presented for the case study of Sorrento Peninsula and two main landslide events recorded during the winter of 1996–1997.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations23
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207