MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183204886 · doi:10.1139/juvs-2020-0033

Application of RPAS to disaster risk reduction in Brazil: application in the analysis of urban floods

2021· article· en· W3183204886 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elaiz Aparecida Mensch Buffon, Francisco Mendonça

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidade Federal do ParanáCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsNatural disasterContext (archaeology)Computer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Emergency managementDisaster risk reductionEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental resource managementGeographyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geotechnologies have significant potential for application in socio-environmental analysis coupled to disaster risk reduction. Equipment and applications are available that are supported by scientific computing, promoting advances in the acquisition and processing of remote sensing data. Among these are two types: (i) the associated equipment to technology LiDAR (light detection and ranging) and (ii) remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) with platforms of remote sensors. Recently, an growing number of studies has been observed that have the potential for applications in the sensors equipped in RPAS for environmental studies, especially those that evaluate the impacts of natural disasters. In this context, the aim of this research is to demonstrate the possibilities of RPAS applications in the collection of data of interest in the management of natural disasters. Also associated with this task is the prospect of implementing some techniques of scientific computing necessary for the implementation of applications. With these activities, we seek to contribute to the advancement of the employment of RPAS in managing and preventing the risk of natural disasters.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.579
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Unmanned Vehicle SystemsSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207