Vulnerability assessment of heat waves within a risk framework using artificial intelligence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current efforts to adapt to climate change are not sufficient to reduce projected impacts. Vulnerability assessments are essential to allocate resources where they are needed most. However, current assessments that use principal component analysis suffer from multiple shortcomings and are hard to translate into concrete actions. To address these issues, this article proposes a novel data-driven vulnerability assessment within a risk framework. The framework is based on the definitions from the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but some definitions, such as sensitivity and adaptive capacity, are clarified. Heat waves that occurred between 2001 and 2018 in Quebec (Canada) are used to validate the framework. The studied impact is the daily mortality rates per cooling degree-days (CDD) region. A vulnerability map is produced to identify the distributions of summer mortality rates in aggregate dissemination areas within each CDD region. Socioeconomic and environmental variables are used to calculate impact and vulnerability. We compared abilities of AutoGluon (an AutoML framework), Gaussian process, and deep Gaussian process to model the impact and vulnerability. We offer advice on how to avoid common pitfalls with artificial intelligence and machine-learning algorithms. Gaussian process is a promising approach for supporting the proposed framework. SHAP values provide an explanation for the model results and are consistent with current knowledge of vulnerability. Recommendations are made to implement the proposed framework quantitatively or qualitatively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".