MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412007477 · doi:10.3390/ijgi14070261

A Spatial-Network Approach to Assessing Transportation Resilience in Disaster-Prone Urban Areas

2025· article· en· W4412007477 on OpenAlexaff
Francesco Rouhana, Dima Jawad

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability Analysis
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResilience (materials science)GeographyEnvironmental planningUrban resilienceEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceTransport engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineeringUrban planningCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Critical transportation networks in developing countries often lack structural robustness and functional redundancy due to insufficient planning and preparedness. These deficiencies increase vulnerability to disruptions and impede effective post-disaster response and recovery. Understanding how such networks perform under stress is essential to improving resilience in hazard-prone urban environments. This paper presents an integrated predictive methodology for assessing the operational resilience of urban transportation networks under extreme events, specifically tailored to data-scarce and high-risk contexts. By combining Geographic Information Systems (GISs) with complex network theory, the framework captures both spatial and topological dependencies. The methodology is applied to Beirut, the capital of Lebanon, a densely populated and disaster-prone Mediterranean city, through scenario-based simulations that account for interdependent stressors such as traffic dynamics, structural fragility, and geophysical hazards. Results reveal that the network exhibits low redundancy and high sensitivity to even minor disruptions, leading to rapid performance degradation. These findings indicate that the network should be classified as highly vulnerable. The study offers a robust framework for assessing infrastructure resilience and supporting evidence-based decision-making in critical urban network management.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations17
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS International Journal of Geo-InformationSame topicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207