Incorporating multi-criteria decision-making and fuzzy-value functions for flood susceptibility assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Floods are among the most frequently occurring natural disasters and the costliest in terms of human life and ecosystem disturbance. Identifying areas susceptible to flooding is important for developing appropriate watershed management policies. As such, the goal of the present study was to develop an integrated framework for flood susceptibility assessment in data-scarce regions, using data from the Haraz watershed in Iran. Flood-influencing indices best suited to the identification of areas particularly prone to flooding were selected. The decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) approach was used to investigate the interdependence among criteria and to develop a network structure representative of the problem. The relative importance of different flood-influencing factors was determined using the analytical network process (ANP). A flood susceptibility map was produced using weights obtained through the ANP and fuzzy-value function (FVF) and validated using 72 available flood locations where flooding occurred between 2006 and 2018. After validating the results, fuzzy theory served to better delineate the flood susceptibility scores among the region’s sub-watersheds. Incorporating the DEMATEL-ANP approach with FVF yielded an accuracy of 89.1%, as was assessed through the area under the curve (AUC) of a receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve. The results indicated that the strongest flood-influencing (occurrence/nonoccurrence) factors were elevation, land use, soil texture, and frequency of heavy rainstorms. The fuzzy theory showed sub-watershed C1 to be highly susceptible to flooding, and thus, most in need of flood management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".