MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320340148 · doi:10.30897/ijegeo.1073697

Application of Remote Sensing and Geographical Information System (GIS) in Flood Vulnerability Mapping: A Scenario of Akure South, Nigeria

2023· article· en· W4320340148 on OpenAlex
Ibrahim Olatunji Raufu, Ibrahim MUKAİLA, Kafayat OLANİYAN, Zachariah AWODELE

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environment and Geoinformatics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsFlood mythVulnerability (computing)Remote sensingGeographic information systemFlooding (psychology)GeographyVulnerability assessmentCartographyShuttle Radar Topography MissionEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Environmental resource managementComputer scienceDigital elevation modelGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In flooding, dry land capable of residential, agricultural, and other economic activities is submerged by overflowing water. This causes loss of lives, properties, and destruction of infrastructure. This study applies remote sensing and GIS techniques to produce a flood vulnerability map of the Akure South metropolis. For this study, satellite image data (Landsat 8), location map of Akure South metropolis, SRTM DEM, rainfall data, soil data, and GPS coordinates; acquired during the field survey were integrated to map areas vulnerable to flooding. Using Pairwise Comparison, the various weights of factors constituting flood in the area were acquired. A weighted linear combination and analytical hierarchical process were used to produce the flood hazard and flood vulnerability map. ArcGIS Pro 2.7.3 software was used in spatial and attribute data acquisition, processing, and information presentation. The flood vulnerability results indicated that the very high vulnerability zone occupied 13.9% of the study area, while high vulnerability zone occupied 25.5%. Moderate vulnerability zone occupied 36.8% while low vulnerability zone occupied 23.8% of the study area. The study shows that, remote sensing and GIS can be effectively implemented to analyse and provide results on flood vulnerability required for prompt and effective decision-making on floods.

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.

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 score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.209 · 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