MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012134137 · doi:10.4000/ideas.7999

Risques d’inondation et vulnérabilité : l’exemple du bassin versant de la rivière Kennebecasis, Nouveau-Brunswick, Canada.

2020· article· fr· W3012134137 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueIdeAs · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Bas-Saint-LaurentUniversité du Québec à MontréalCollège Communautaire du Nouveau-BrunswickUniversité de MonctonEmployment and Social Development CanadaGovernment of New BrunswickUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesForestryPolitical scienceGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La province du Nouveau-Brunswick, située dans l’est du Canada, est très affectée par les inondations. Bien que moins documentée que l’aléa, la dimension humaine du risque que représente la vulnérabilité est importante pour l’adaptation des populations. Cet article fait un survol des principaux concepts liés à la vulnérabilité et présente leur application à l’échelle d’un bassin versant de taille moyenne. Les résultats montrent la nécessité de considérer simultanément la perception et la préparation au risque d’inondation. En effet, si certains résidents dans les zones à risque ont une bonne connaissance des inondations et une perception réaliste du risque, cela ne se traduit pas nécessairement par une préparation adaptée et adéquate face au risque. La réduction du risque passe indéniablement par une meilleure sensibilisation et éducation de la population.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.222 · 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