MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386786241 · doi:10.1080/23789689.2023.2257511

A novel method for quantifying risks to climate change events using conditional value at risk: a multi-unit residential building case study in London, Ontario

2023· article· en· W4386786241 on OpenAlexaffabout
Milad Rostami, Santinah Green-Mignacca, Scott Bucking

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainable and Resilient Infrastructure · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCVARVulnerability (computing)Climate changeMetric (unit)Risk managementComputer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Environmental resource managementCivil engineeringEnvironmental scienceExpected shortfallBusinessEngineeringOperations managementFinanceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change may lead to more frequent and severe weather events, resulting in significant financial and human health impacts. This paper develops a risk metric using building performance simulation by associating thermal and incidental risks in buildings during power outages while considering multiple cold and hot events. Conditional Value at Risk (CVaR) is calculated using variations in outage events. According to the results, employing an integrated building design and a microgrid with photovoltaic panels that can be disconnected from the grid halves vulnerability related to ice storms and completely mitigates it for historical heatwave events. The variability study has revealed that a code-minimum design has eight times the CVaR of the as-built design. This novel methodology has the potential to inform future environmental, social, and corporate governance strategies and assist infrastructure operators in managing their risk exposure to future climate change events, considering various types of risks and multiple hazards.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.643
Threshold uncertainty score0.711

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.363
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
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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainable and Resilient InfrastructureSame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207