MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391788361 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2024.109129

Assessing coastal vulnerability at the village level using a robust framework, the example of Canacona in South Goa, India

2024· article· en· W4391788361 on OpenAlexaff
Ritwik Nigam, Alvarinho J. Luis, Alexandre S. Gagnon, Eric Vaz, Bruno Damásio, Mahender Kotha

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaUniversity Grants Commission
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Vulnerability indexGeographyVulnerability assessmentIndex (typography)Environmental resource managementClimate changeScale (ratio)Adaptation (eye)Environmental protectionEnvironmental scienceCartographyEcologyComputer sciencePsychological resilienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change poses a significant threat to coastal regions worldwide. This study presents and applies a modified Coastal Vulnerability Index (CVI) to assess coastal vulnerability at the village level, focusing on Canacona, a taluka in South Goa, India. It adapts the existing CVI methodology by incorporating additional variables to better represent the various dimensions of vulnerability, resulting in 21 variables split into a Physical Vulnerability Index (PVI) and a Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI). The results show spatial variability in coastal vulnerability across the studied villages, with Agonda and Nagercem-Chaudi found to be highly vulnerable and Loliem to be the least vulnerable. A hydrological modeling approach is also used to compare the CVI of every village with their susceptibility to inundation due to rising sea levels. The results demonstrate the influence of local factors on vulnerability, challenging previous taluka-level assessments given the scale upon which adaptation typically takes place.

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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones ResearchFrench-language works237,207