MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399810983 · doi:10.1007/s13753-024-00568-4

Seismic Risk Model for the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei Region, China: Considering Epistemic Uncertainty from the Seismic Hazard Models

2024· article· en· W4399810983 on OpenAlexaff
Jian Ma, Katsuichiro Goda, Kai Liu, Anirudh Rao, Ming Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Disaster Risk Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeijingChinaSeismic hazardUncertainty quantificationSeismologyHazardRisk modelSeismic riskGeologyEnvironmental scienceEconometricsGeographyStatisticsMathematicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study presents a probabilistic seismic risk model for the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei region in China. The model comprises a township-level residential building exposure model, a vulnerability model derived from the Chinese building taxonomy, and a regional probabilistic seismic hazard model. The three components are integrated by a stochastic event-based method of the OpenQuake engine to assess the regional seismic risk in terms of average annual loss and exceedance probability curve at the city, province, and regional levels. The novelty and uniqueness of this study are that a probabilistic seismic risk model for the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei region in China is developed by considering the impact of site conditions and epistemic uncertainty from the seismic hazard model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 venueInternational Journal of Disaster Risk ScienceSame topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207