MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Machine Learning Models for Storm Damage Prediction in Nova Scotia, Canada

2023· article· en· W4387871109 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mufaddal Lokhandwala, Ahmed Saif, Alireza Ghasemi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretabilityRobustness (evolution)StormComputer scienceRandom forestMachine learningArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceDeep learningScalabilityNova scotiaPredictive powerPredictive modellingWind powerMeteorologyEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Power loss due to storms is a recurring problem in Nova Scotia (NS) that affects hundreds of thousands of households every year. Accurate prediction of the location and magnitude of power outages caused by storms is crucial for developing effective response plans. This study proposes and tests two machine learning models, a deep neural network and a random forest, for storm damage prediction in NS. Historical weather and damage data are used to train the models, which incorporate multiple input features such as wind speed, gust and direction. Both models are found capable of predicting outages with a mean absolute error of around 0.05 (i.e., an accuracy of 95%), outperforming the currently-used regression based tool. Furthermore, comparison against other machine learning algorithms demonstrates the advantages of the proposed models in terms of accuracy, interpretability, scalability and robustness.

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)0.000
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207