MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405713428 · doi:10.29173/hsi470

Natural disasters disproportionately affect populations and regions: A disaster analysis of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami

2022· article· en· W4405713428 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ella Korenvain

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Science Inquiry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural disasterAffect (linguistics)Indian oceanGeographyOceanographyGeologyMeteorologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is a comprehensive review of the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami that took place in Sumatra, Indonesia. The causes, as well as the direct and indirect impacts of this natural disaster are explored to understand the tsunami’s true damage and magnitude. A disaster risk analysis was conducted to provide an overview of the relationship between various interacting factors: the hazard, peoples’ exposure to the hazard, and their vulnerability to the hazard. This analysis is key in interpreting the risk of the hazard and determining its deadliness. Solutions and efforts to improve safety and resilience after the disaster are analyzed through several hazard paradigm lenses. The paradigms provide a well-rounded overview of the multifaceted nature of a hazard to better understand, plan, and mitigate associated risks. An overview of geographic areas and populations most at risk, as well as prospective solutions are described. Finally, this paper briefly discusses the growing impact of climate change on the frequency, risk, and magnitude of future extreme weather events.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.390
Teacher spread0.326 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Science InquirySame topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207