MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401113744 · doi:10.1109/wfpst58552.2024.00041

Sustainable Flood Risk Identification and Assessment Using Artificial Intelligence: A Literature Review and Case Scenario

2024· review· en· W4401113744 on OpenAlexaff
Imran Ahmed, Misbah Ahmad, Abdellah Chehri, Gwanggil Joen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Flood mythComputer scienceFlood risk assessmentRisk assessmentRisk analysis (engineering)Artificial intelligenceBusinessComputer securityGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The combination of Internet of Things (IoT) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been widely applied in various fields, including transportation, agriculture, tourism, smart cities, environmental monitoring, and security. The growing accessibility of satellite and drone imagery, as well as remote sensing data, such as drones, has enabled the efficient utilization and training of deep learning algorithms. These algorithms can accurately identify, categorize, and partition flood areas in real-time. By integrating artificial intelligence (Al)-powered flood detection algorithms with additional data sources, such as meteorological forecasts and ground-based sensors, it is possible to create robust flood monitoring systems. These systems can offer timely alerts for potential flood events and enable efficient emergency response measures. The paper outlines advanced functionalities and technologies that will be available by integrating the Internet of Things (IoT) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) for flood monitoring. The paper provides a comprehensive overview of AI-IoT visions, services, applications, and the networking infrastructure involved. Additionally, it includes a vast assortment of satellite images.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207