MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400427071 · doi:10.56397/jrssh.2024.06.05

Volcanic Eruption: Case Studies of Italy Country

2024· article· en· W4400427071 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vinod Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Research in Social Science and Humanities · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolcanoVulcanian eruptionGeologyGeographySeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is a well-known fact that among all the major natural disasters, earthquakes and volcanic eruptions have a special place because they originate inside the earth. While an earthquake can occur anywhere although there are preferred areas of high seismicity, volcanic eruptions take place through the existing vents in the earth’s crust. These vents or volcanoes are known locations although new vents or volcanoes can also take birth by volcanic activity. The mainland of our country has no history of such hazards. There are two minor volcanoes in the Andaman Islands and one of these has been silent for long. Fortunately, India is not much affected. However, other countries like Ethiopia, Italy, Canada, Japan, Mexico, USA, Colombia, Iceland, New Zealand, Indonesia, Philippines, and USSR are among those facing volcanic activity, quite serious at times. It can be stated without fear of contradiction that Italy is the country with a long history of volcanic eruptions, some of which have been notoriously disastrous. Therefore, in this research paper discuss a few case studies with special reference to the famous volcanoes of Italy, like Mount Etna, Mount Vesuvius, Stromboli and Vulcano.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Research in Social Science and HumanitiesSame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207