MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385575894 · doi:10.2166/hydro.2023.194

Development of an agent-based model to improve emergency planning for floods and dam failures

2023· article· en· W4385575894 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of Hydroinformatics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBC Hydro
KeywordsFlood mythTailings damEmergency evacuationDam failureEmergency managementEmergency planningPsychological interventionNatural disasterEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceCivil engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Transport engineeringWater resource managementEnvironmental planningGeographyEngineeringTailingsBusinessMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Life Safety Model (LSM) is an agent-based model which assists with emergency planning and risk assessments for floods and dam failures by providing estimates of fatalities and evacuation times. The LSM represents the interactions of agents (i.e. people, vehicles, and buildings) with the floodwater. The LSM helps to increase the accuracy of estimates of loss of life and evacuation times for these events by taking into account a number of parameters which are not described in empirical models, such as the people's characteristics (e.g. age and gender), building construction types, and the road network. The LSM has been applied to three historic flood-related disasters: the 1953 coastal floods, in the UK; the 1959 Malpasset Dam failure, in France; the 2019 Brumadinho tailings dam disaster, in Brazil. These illustrate how the LSM has been verified and improvements to evacuation routes, early warnings, and the refuge locations could have reduced the number of fatalities. The value of using the LSM is not to calculate the ‘exact’ number of flood deaths or evacuation times, but to assess if emergency management interventions can significantly reduce them. The LSM can also be used to assess whether the societal risk posed by dams and flood defences is ‘acceptable’.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.277 · 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