MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411363901 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2025-0118

Evaluating ENSO-driven risks to strengthen transportation system resilience of Canadian provinces

2025· article· en· W4411363901 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Golam Kabir, Muhammad Rehan Anis

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersFaculty of Graduate Studies and Research, University of Regina
KeywordsResilience (materials science)El Niño Southern OscillationBusinessTransport engineeringEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningGeographyEngineeringClimatologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the effects of El Niño/La Niña Southern Oscillation (ENSO) on Canadian transportation networks, including road, rail, transit, and active transportation systems. It highlights hazards such as flooding, drought, wildfires, and storm surges, particularly in regions like British Columbia, Alberta, and the Maritimes. The study discusses the challenges for emergency managers, transportation operators, and planners in developing mitigation and adaptation strategies. As climate change intensifies ENSO impacts, understanding these effects is crucial for strengthening infrastructure resilience. While focused on Canada, the findings also have implications for other Northern Hemisphere regions. The study emphasizes the need for further research on ENSO-climate change linkages and enhanced training for transportation professionals. ENSO applications provide a strategic approach to bridging short-term weather events with long-term climate trends, offering valuable insights for improving the adaptability of Canada's transportation systems in the face of increasing climate variability.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.920

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2025
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207