MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6976780826 · doi:10.60692/0jtm4-z5q32

Probabilistic Resilience-Guided Infrastructure Risk Management

2020· article· en· W6976780826 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicResilience (materials science)HazardRisk managementProbabilistic risk assessmentRisk assessmentHazard analysisNatural hazard

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increased frequency and magnitude of natural and anthropogenic hazard events that affected infrastructure systems over the past two decades have highlighted the need for more effective risk management strategies. Such strategies are expected to not only manage the immediate disruption to system's functionality following hazard realization, but to also mitigate the latter's extended-term consequences (e.g., recovery cost and restoration time), which would otherwise be disastrous. To yield realistic managerial insights, such resilience-guided risk management necessitates accounting for the different sources of uncertainties associated with both the hazard quantification and the response of the infrastructure being considered. Through considering such uncertainties, the probabilistic resilience quantification framework developed in this study is expected to provide valuable managerial insights to guide resource allocations for both pre- and posthazard realization. The applicability of the framework is demonstrated on a simplified system subjected to different anthropogenic hazard scenarios. Beyond the presented case study, the developed framework lays the foundation for adopting probabilistic resilience quantification to guide the next-generation risk management processes of infrastructure systems under different forms of natural and anthropogenic hazards.

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 score0.394
Threshold uncertainty score0.776

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.177 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207