MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399722057 · doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2024.105541

Agent-based post-earthquake evacuation simulation to enhance early-stage architectural layout and non-structural design

2024· article· en· W4399722057 on OpenAlexaff
Sajjad Hassanpour, Vicente A. González, Yang Zou, Jiamou Liu, Guillermo Cabrera‐Guerrero

Bibliographic record

VenueAutomation in Construction · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectural designEngineeringStage (stratigraphy)Computer scienceConstruction engineeringEarthquake simulationEngineering drawingCivil engineeringArchitectureGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the indoor design process, architects make crucial decisions regarding architectural layout and the selection of non-structural elements. However, there is a lack of comprehensive consideration for human evacuation behavior, specifically in the event of earthquake evacuation, during the design process. This paper bridges this gap by presenting the application of Agent-Based Building Earthquake Evacuation Simulation (AB 2 E 2 S). The paper assesses a post-earthquake evacuation simulation prototype, which integrates an agent-based simulation technique with probabilistic earthquake damage assessment. The model is applied to the case of the engineering building at The University of Auckland, to evaluate the impact of earthquake intensity, design, and behavioral variables on Safe Evacuation Time and number of casualties. Overall, this paper demonstrates the potential of the AB 2 E 2 S prototype to inform architects and designers about the effective selection of non-structural elements and architectural layout scenarios for post-earthquake evacuation during the schematic design process.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.731

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAutomation in ConstructionSame topicEvacuation and Crowd DynamicsFrench-language works237,207