When all else fails: amateur radio becomes lifeline of communications during a disaster
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the past events where communication challenges have occurred during a disaster, and events in which amateur radio had played a vital role in creating reliable communication links during the disaster response. Furthermore, this paper identifies the modern technology available with amateur radio operators that can be used to create reliable communication networks in order to meet the high demand of disaster communication. Design/methodology/approach In this paper the author has conducted an integrative literature review, while analyzing case studies of disasters where communication challenges have occurred and the amateur radio has provided communication support during a disaster response. Findings In today’s world there is a heavy reliance on centralized communications infrastructure such as cell towers, which are very likely to fail during a disaster. Failure or overload of such infrastructure will cause disruptions in communications and make the disaster response inefficient. Amateur radio does not rely on centralized communications infrastructure, and has the ability to be used to meet the demand during many disaster situations. Thus, it is very important for emergency professionals to understand the value of including amateur radio operators in emergency operations plans. Research limitations/implications Research is qualitative in nature, with an aim to write a short paper introducing the issues of Disaster Communications. Originality/value This paper is intended to provide an insight about the importance of reliable communications during a disaster. Communication interruptions can create a lot of problems and cause inadequate coordination between response agencies. In order to mitigate such challenges it is crucial to study the vital role of amateur radio in supporting the communications when all other mediums of communication fail.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".