MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4256051237 · doi:10.22215/etd/2019-13600

The Flood Tower Network: A Warning System for St. Lawrence Riparians

2019· dissertation· en· W4256051237 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rachel Rodd

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlooding (psychology)Flood mythTowerFloodplainCommunity networkFlood controlWarning systemGeographyFlood warningGeneral partnershipArchitectureEnvironmental planningCivil engineeringEngineeringEnvironmental resource managementTelecommunicationsEnvironmental scienceCartographyPolitical scienceArchaeologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis questions whether our dependence on the extensive river infrastructure of dams and spillways and leading edge communication technologies are sufficient means of community protection against flooding in an era of climate change and unpredictable floodplain development. Can architecture serve communities to promote a greater understanding of local rivers and raise an awareness for flooding while revealing the invisible — and often underestimated — forces of water around us?A network of Flood Towers are proposed along the St. Lawrence and Ottawa Rivers. Subverting the legacy of prevailing water control infrastructure, these Towers stand as physical reminders of inundated villages of the past and serve as warnings to lost villages of the future. A House Moving network is proposed in partnership with the Towers to enable communities to rapidly withdraw their homes from the unstable landscapes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.238
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207