MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283382843 · doi:10.3808/jeil.202200079

Extending Simulation Decomposition Analysis into Systemic Risk Planning for Domino-Like Cascading Effects in Environmental Systems

2022· article· en· W4283382843 on OpenAlexaff
Mariia Kozlova, Julian Scott Yeomans

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Informatics Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersBusiness Finland
KeywordsDomino effectComputer scienceInterdependenceCascading failureVisualizationRisk analysis (engineering)Visual analyticsConstruct (python library)Complex systemDiscrete event simulationDecision support systemComponent (thermodynamics)Event (particle physics)DecompositionAnalyticsReliability engineeringData miningSimulationElectric power systemEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In interconnected environmental systems, the innocuous failure of one component can sometimes trigger a subsequent domino-like effect resulting in a cascading collapse of the entire system. Risk analysis in “real world” contexts frequently requires the need to simultaneously contrast numerous uncertain factors and difficult-to-capture dimensions. Monte Carlo simulation modelling has often been employed to integrate uncertain inputs and to construct probability distributions of the resulting outputs. Visual analytics and data visualization can be used to support the processing, analyzing, and communicating of the influence of multi-variable uncertainties on the decision-making process. In this paper, the novel Simulation Decomposition (SimDec) analytical technique is extended into complex assessments of cascading risk analysis and used to quantitatively examine situations involving potentially catastrophic, dominolike collapses of an entire system. SimDec analysis proves to be beneficial due to its ability to reveal interdependencies in complex models, its ease of decision-maker perception, its visualizable analytic capabilities, and its significantly lower computational burdens. The case example visually demonstrates that when a system collapse is a low-probability/high-impact event, more expensive, reactive policies minimize the overall value loss under conditions of system survival, while more proactive policies enable better loss prevention under system survival. However, proactive approaches significantly decrease the likelihoods and magnitudes of losses for scenarios resulting from the collapse of the system. Such findings would not have been revealed without the visualization provided by SimDec.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Informatics LettersSame topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207