MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On the Prediction of a Multidimensional Vulnerability Index for Climate Resilience

2024· article· en· W4407737498 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew H. Kemp, Letetia Addison, Patrick Hosein

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResilience (materials science)Vulnerability (computing)Index (typography)Computer scienceVulnerability indexClimate changeEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceComputer securityGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As regions across the globe become more susceptible to natural disasters, economic shocks, and climate change, the accurate prediction of their vulnerability is becoming more essential for resilience planning. This study proposes an innovative application of machine learning modeling techniques to forecast the Multidimensional Vulnerability Index scores for climate-vulnerable countries, especially those located within the Caribbean. While previous studies have utilized traditional methods for calculating vulnerability indices or done so on smaller scales, our approach leverages machine learning to demonstrate its predictive accuracy and explore the relationships between various predictors influencing vulnerability. This paper presents the first comprehensive attempt to apply machine learning to vulnerability prediction on the international scale, offering a data-driven approach to guide policy decisions in disaster risk management and climate resilience planning.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.243
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAgricultural risk and resilienceFrench-language works237,207