MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

FIELD MEASUREMENTS OF TSUNAMI EVACUATION DYNAMICS

2025· article· en· W4410871544 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joseph Kim, Naoto Inagaki, Ioan Nistor, Andrew Cornett, Enda Murphy, Nils Goseberg, Tomoya Shibayama

Bibliographic record

VenueCoastal Engineering Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEarthquake and Tsunami Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField (mathematics)Dynamics (music)GeologyGeographyPhysicsMathematicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) threatens Vancouver Island, Canada, with a significant risk of near- field tsunamis. Both oral history and geological records (Ludwin et al., 2005) document the last major CSZ tsunami event in the year 1700. To mitigate the loss of life during tsunami events, soft measures, such as evacuation planning, have been suggested (Shibayama et al., 2013). Considering that Vancouver Island is expected to face wave arrival times within 20 minutes for a CSZ tsunami (Takabatake et al., 2019), detailed and accurate evacuation planning is essential. Agent-based models (ABMs) have been recommended in preference to Geographic Information Systems (GIS) when performing evacuation assessments as they can portray evacuation dynamics more realistically (Kim et al., 2022). While tsunami evacuation ABMs have been used to assess life safety for multiple coastal communities (Mas et al., 2015), there is a significant lack of data on tsunami evacuation behaviour to inform and calibrate these ABMs.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCoastal Engineering ProceedingsSame topicEarthquake and Tsunami EffectsFrench-language works237,207