MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410954954 · doi:10.1016/j.firesaf.2025.104439

A provisional fire risk characterization of informal settlements of different scales in San Jose, Costa Rica

2025· article· en· W4410954954 on OpenAlexafffund
Sara Guevara Arce, Chloe Jeanneret, John Gales, Mohamed Beshir

Bibliographic record

VenueFire Safety Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaYork University
KeywordsInformal settlementsHuman settlementGeographyForensic engineeringEngineeringEnvironmental scienceArchaeologyEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

: This study gathers and explores qualitative information from four informal settlements within San Jose, Costa Rica, to help define future informal settlements’ fire safety research. In this paper, field visits to the four different settlements were conducted. Two of which are categorized as “large”, being over 0.50 km 2 , while the other two are “small” being between 0 and 0.25 km 2 . The physical differences and similarities observed in each settlement are considered with the aim to determine how these features might affect the fire risk and population response in case of a fire event. Through these visits, it was possible to conclude that informal settlements of similar size share several characteristics, while there is a clear difference between those of different sizes. The main differences and similarities were related to waste-management, proximity, type of construction of the houses, materials used, and organization within the community. This research also discusses current challenges faced by practitioners when performing informal settlements fire spread and evacuation modeling.

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 score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueFire Safety JournalSame topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207