MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402477108 · doi:10.11159/icceia24.155

Earthquake Vulnerability Evaluation of Istanbul's Districts Using DEA-Based Models

2024· article· en· W4402477108 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mehmet GÜDELEK, E.Ertugrul KARSAK

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on New Technologies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSeismology and Earthquake Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Computer scienceVulnerability assessmentComputer securityMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent earthquakes in southeastern Türkiye have highlighted the need for disaster preparedness in the country's most populous city, Istanbul.Scientists believe that a huge earthquake is likely to strike Istanbul.Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is a valuable tool for evaluating the efficiency of decision-making units (DMU) in various managerial areas, including disaster management.This study employs common-weight DEA-based models, which enable incorporating interval data, to evaluate the earthquake vulnerability of Istanbul's districts.Building stock, and estimated ground motions are taken as inputs while expected disaster losses and damages are used as outputs for assessing the earthquake vulnerability.The results depict that the most vulnerable district of Istanbul to earthquakes is Fatih while the least vulnerable one is Sile.The proposed earthquake vulnerability evaluation approach can be a practical guide for authorities for disaster risk reduction projects.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on New TechnologiesSame topicSeismology and Earthquake StudiesFrench-language works237,207