MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386163192 · doi:10.1080/19475705.2023.2250531

Spatial and temporal evolution of post-disaster data for damage assessment of civil infrastructure systems

2023· article· en· W4386163192 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jorge-Mario Lozano, Elliot Nichols, James D. Frost, Iris Tien

Bibliographic record

VenueGeomatics Natural Hazards and Risk · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEgg Farmers of CanadaNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyUniversity of Notre DameRensselaer Polytechnic Institute
KeywordsMetadataInteroperabilityComputer scienceData scienceProcess (computing)Volunteered geographic informationField (mathematics)Data integrationSpatial analysisSpatial data infrastructureData qualityData collectionData miningInformation retrievalGeographyWorld Wide WebRemote sensingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Assessing damage to civil infrastructure is a resource-intensive process that is critical during the response to a disaster. Various datasets facilitate this process but are often collected on an individual ad hoc basis by multiple separate entities. Consequently, there is a lack of a coordinated approach when collecting disaster data, which prevents effective data interoperability. Rather than viewing datasets individually, this paper provides a comprehensive analysis of post-disaster damage data to demonstrate the merits of a dynamic data collection process accounting for both spatial and temporal variations. Specifically, datasets from Hurricane Maria and the Indios Earthquake in Puerto Rico are used to illustrate the entities involved, resources used, and resulting datasets for this purpose. The paper analyzes the evolution of key metadata features as a function of time, including data availability, coverage, and resolution. The results show distinct stages of the data collection process and reveal challenges in collaboration between entities and a lack of data integration for disaster response. The findings also lead to recommendations about the essential metadata for increased shareability. With these outcomes, entities in the field can improve the quality of information extracted and facilitate interoperability and information integration across datasets for damage assessment.

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 score0.337
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeomatics Natural Hazards and RiskSame topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207