MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313131415 · doi:10.33411/ijist/2022040203

Efficacy of Flood relief measures - 2010: A case study of district Layyah, Punjab-Pakistan

2022· article· en· W4313131415 on OpenAlexaff
Shahid Bukhari, Alamgir Akhtar Khan, Magdalena Ivasecko, Farah Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Innovations in Science and Technology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDamagesFlood mythGovernment (linguistics)GeographySocioeconomicsEmergency managementLivestockBusinessLocal governmentEconomic growthEnvironmental planningPolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2010, Pakistan experienced a massive flood that took the lives of 1985 individuals, in addition to causing huge damage to livestock, shelters, and domestic goods. Multiple local and international organizations extended support to the victims of the 2010 Pakistan flood. Beside relief support, media highly criticized their relief activities. The study was conducted in the district of Layyah, in the Punjab province of Pakistan. The study primarily aims at determining aspects of the flood relating to: ground situation and extent of damages, quality of services provided by the government and non-government organizations (NGOs). The study gathers data and analysis of data was carried out with simple statistical techniques. Ground situation in the country appeared alarming: flood affected 160,000 square kilometer of land, damaged to crop approached US$ 0ne billion, and affected around 20 million people. In the study area 40 % of livestock could not survive, 94.5 % houses were completed abolished and 38.7 % of domestic goods were heavily damaged. District government role was appreciated by 66.4 % of the respondents. Around 50 % of the respondents reported against the performance of the Provincial Disaster Management Authority and National Disaster Management Authority. 96.2 % of the respondents recognized the role of NGOs while respondents suggested working of NGOs through district governments.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Innovations in Science and TechnologySame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207