Storms as Forming and Threatening Factors for Coasts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Storms are the most significant meteorological phenomena that affect the formation of coasts and human livelihood along them. Thus, risks related to coastal storms, such as flooding, loss of land, shipping, and other offshore activity, have had a significant influence on coastal societies and their economies. In the early 21st century, anthropogenic climate change will affect the locations and intensities of coastal storminess, impacting society. Storms are studied not only by natural scientists but also by social scientists. The former deal with the climatologies, dynamics, and mechanisms of storms but also with the identification of different types of storms, such as extratropical baroclinic storms, explosive cyclones, tropical storms, polar lows, medicanes, Vb-cyclones, and Australian east coast storms. Their significance is often through their physical impacts, in particular ocean waves and storm surges, which were and are associated with massive losses of lives, sometimes up to several hundred thousand people, and wealth. The perceptions of what storms constitute were different in different cultural contexts and times. In earlier days, higher forces were responsible for such storms, which they used to transfer messages to humans, physically based ideas have been forming since the 16th century. Another significant historical development was societies preparing to reduce their vulnerability to storms and to implement practices of insurance and risk 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".