A Community Impact Scale for Regional Disaster Planning with Transportation Disruption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a simple analytical scheme and associated qualitative impact scales that capture the spatially varying effects of a regional disaster. Large-scale disasters that affect many towns and cities pose particular challenges for emergency response planning. For example, disruption to transportation systems can impede regional supply chains of critical goods, thereby exacerbating the impacts suffered locally in communities. Conventional metrics of disaster severity, such as number of casualties or intensity of ground shaking, do not adequately capture how community impacts and needs may vary across the affected region, and they do not typically consider regional transportation disruption. Using a series of impact scales, the approach in this paper captures essential attributes of three broad components related to community impacts from a regional disaster—local disaster impacts in a community, regional transportation disruption to the community, and the community’s coping capacity—and aggregates them to an overall metric of community impact. The approach can be implemented with widely varying degrees of data availability, as demonstrated in two case applications. Both cases involve an M9 Cascadia subduction zone earthquake affecting a broad region of coastal British Columbia, Canada. The first application illustrates how in a pre-event planning situation, modeled results can be used to anticipate which communities are at greatest risk, and to help prioritize mitigation and emergency response planning. The second case demonstrates how in the immediate aftermath of a disaster, the approach can be used with limited information to help prioritize response and recovery activities.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".