Towards Landslides Early Warning System With Fog - Edge Computing And Artificial Intelligence**
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Landslides are phenomena that cause significant human and economic losses. Researchers have investigated the prediction of high landslides susceptibility with various methodologies based upon statistical and mathematical models, in addition to artificial intelligence tools. These methodologies allow to determine the areas that could present a serious risk of landslides. Monitoring these risky areas is particularly important for developing an Early Warning Systems (EWS). As matter of fact, the variety of landslides’ types make their monitoring a sophisticated task to accomplish. Indeed, each landslide area has its own specificities and potential triggering factors; therefore, there is no single device that can monitor all types of landslides. Consequently, Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) combined with Internet of Things (IoT) allow to set up large-scale data acquisition systems. In addition, recent advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Federated Learning (FL) allow to develop performant algorithms to analyze this data and predict early landslides events at edge level (on gateways). These algorithms are trained in this case at fog level on specific hardware. The novelty of the work proposed in this paper is the integration of Federated Learning based on Fog-Edge approaches to continuously improve prediction models.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".