MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210300877 · doi:10.1002/fam.3052

A cost‐effective building fire smoke spread prediction approach for risk mitigation based on data assimilation using Ensemble Kalman Filter

2022· article· en· W4210300877 on OpenAlexaff
Long Ding, Yin Li, Jie Ji, Cheng-Chun Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueFire and Materials · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersAnhui Provincial Key Research and Development PlanFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsEnsemble Kalman filterData assimilationSmokeKalman filterEnvironmental scienceRange (aeronautics)Computer scienceMeteorologyExtended Kalman filterEngineeringArtificial intelligenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Prediction of building fire smoke spread behaviors plays an important role in the evacuation in an emergency to mitigate fire risk. Based on data assimilation, a cost‐effective approach was proposed to predict fire smoke spread behaviors under unknown mixed disturbances by combining a zone model (CFAST) and Ensemble Kalman Filter (EnKF). CFAST is used to predict fire smoke spread behaviors as a deterministic fire model. Sensor data of smoke temperature were assimilated into CFAST simulation by leveraging EnKF to estimate unknown heat release rate (HRR) and thus improving the prediction accuracy. The performance of the proposed approach was tested via a series of Observing Systems Simulation Experiments. Two series of cases were conducted for unknown single HRR change disturbance and unknown single‐window breakage disturbance, one series of cases was conducted for unknown mixed HRR change and window breakage disturbances. Result comparisons have been presented in figures to assess the approach performance qualitatively, and root mean square errors (RMSEs) have been calculated to assess the approach performance quantitatively. The RMSEs are within the range of 1.78–29.88 K. The results showed that it was a viable solution to set a larger perturbation range for unknown disturbances. The proposed approach could provide more accurate and reliable predictive information about fire smoke spread behaviors for risk mitigation, as well as other safety‐related applications.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFire and MaterialsSame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207