MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003802494 · doi:10.1177/8755293019899953

Development of a global seismic risk model

2020· article· en· W3003802494 on OpenAlexaff
Vítor Silva, Desmond Amo-Oduro, Alejandro Calderón, Catarina Costa, Jamal Dabbeek, Venetia Despotaki, Luís Martins, Marco Pagani, Anirudh Rao, Michele Simionato, Daniele Viganò, Catalina Yepes-Estrada, Ana María Acevedo, Helen Crowley, Nick Horspool, Kishor Jaiswal, Murray Journeay, Massimiliano Pittore

Bibliographic record

VenueEarthquake Spectra · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsBC Studies
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFragilityEarthquake scenarioVulnerability (computing)Seismic hazardSeismic riskUrban seismic riskHazardProbabilistic logicOccupancyRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceEngineeringCivil engineeringBusinessComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2015, the Global Earthquake Model (GEM) Foundation and its partners have been supporting regional programs and bilateral collaborations to develop an open global earthquake risk model. These efforts led to the development of a repository of probabilistic seismic hazard models, a global exposure dataset comprising structural and occupancy information regarding the residential, commercial and industrial buildings, and a comprehensive set of fragility and vulnerability functions for the most common building classes. These components were used to estimate probabilistic earthquake risk globally using the OpenQuake‐engine, an open‐source software for seismic hazard and risk analysis. This model allows estimating a number of risk metrics such as annualized average losses or aggregated losses for particular return periods, which are fundamental to the development and implementation of earthquake risk mitigation measures.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations195
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarthquake SpectraSame topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207