Emergency calls during the 2013 southern Ontario ice storm: case study of Vaughan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Responding to emergency incidents by emergency response organizations such as fire, ambulance and police during large disaster and emergency events is very important. The purpose of this paper is to provide some insights into response patterns during the 2013 ice storm in the city of Vaughan, Ontario, Canada, using temporal and spatial analyses. Design/methodology/approach The City of Vaughan Fire and Rescue Service data set containing all responses to fire and other emergency incidents from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2016 was used. The 2013 Southern Ontario ice storm occurred from December 20, 2013 to January 1, 2014, and, for this study, December 20–31 is considered the “study period.” Temporal, spatial and spatiotemporal analyses of responses during the study period are carried out and are compared with the same period in other years (2009–2012 and 2014–2016). Findings The findings show that temporal patterns of response attributes changed significantly during the 2013 ice storm. Similarly, the spatial pattern of responses during the 2013 ice storm showed some major differences with other years. The spatiotemporal analyses also demonstrate significant variations in responses in the city during different hours of the day in the ice storm days. Originality/value This study is the first study to examine the spatiotemporal patterns of responses made by a fire department during the 2013 ice storm in Canada. It provides some insights into the differences between response volumes, temporal and spatial distributions during large emergency events (e.g. ice storm) and normal situations. The results will help in mitigating the number of responses in the future through public education and technological changes. Moreover, the results will provide fire departments with information that could help them prepare for such events by possible reallocation of resources.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".