Protecting oil storage tanks against floods: Natech risk assessment with imprecise probabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Natechs are technological accidents that are triggered by natural disasters. The increase in the frequency and severity of climatic natural disasters along with the growth of industrialization has accelerated the demand for development of dedicated methodologies for risk assessment and management of Natechs. Due to a lack of accurate and sufficient data, risk assessment of Natechs has largely been based on subjective assumptions and imprecise probabilities, making the assessed risks and the subsequent risk management strategies deficient in terms of cost‐effectiveness. In the present study, evidence theory, as an effective technique for dealing with imprecise probabilities, and Bayesian network, as an effective tool for reasoning under uncertainty, are combined to develop a methodology for risk analysis of Natechs based on imprecise probabilities with no attempt to increase the precision of the input data but the accuracy and cost‐effectiveness of the outcomes. Flotation of oil tanks during floods has been considered to exemplify the methodology. The methodology is demonstrated to outperform conventional approaches where average probabilities or generic probability distributions are used instead of interval probabilities for risk assessment and management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".