Fairness and accountability of AI in disaster risk management: Opportunities and challenges
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Disaster risk management (DRM) seeks to help societies prepare for, mitigate, or recover from the adverse impacts of disasters and climate change. Core to DRM are disaster risk models that rely heavily on geospatial data about the natural and built environments. Developers are increasingly turning to artificial intelligence (AI) to improve the quality of these models. Yet, there is still little understanding of how the extent of hidden geospatial biases affects disaster risk models and how accountability relationships are affected by these emerging actors and methods. In many cases, there is also a disconnect between the algorithm designers and the communities where the research is conducted or algorithms are implemented. This perspective highlights emerging concerns about the use of AI in DRM. We discuss potential concerns and illustrate what must be considered from a data science, ethical, and social perspective to ensure the responsible usage of AI in this field.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it