MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6996581088

Simulating The Evacuation Of Students Attending Classes At The York University's Keele Campus

2015· other· en· W6996581088 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2015
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)PreparednessEmergency managementNothingEmergency planningCivil defenseAttendanceSet (abstract data type)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 1901, Canada has recorded over a thousand disasters (CDD, 2015). Ontario, a province possessing the highest number of incidents and evacuations, has adapted and learned from these experiences. The Emergency Movement and Civil Protection Act (1990) for example, legally obliged government organizations to maintain an emergency management program. Despite the measures set out by the government there were still a dominant paradigm of disaster, leading many to believe nothing could be done, when one occurs, or that they would not be affected one. Morris (2009) proved otherwise when it came to school shootings (a technological disaster). Morris illustrated awareness and preparedness in school led to resilient students who were less affected by the disasters. An important observation, as school disasters in particular have the ability to cause jarring impacts to a community. This Major Paper presents a simulation model that evacuates students attending classes at the York University Keele Campus. The agent-based model was constructed with data acquired from York University's Office of Institutional Planning & Analysis, York University?s Planning & Architectural Design branch of the Campus Services and Business Operation, and scientific journals. The model reproduces the number of registered students during the winter semester of 2014, from Monday to Sunday. This cycle stops, when a signal is given, informing of an evacuation. From this instance, students, proceeded through a series of steps before arriving to one of four predetermined evacuation zones. These steps included: 1) pre-movement 2) descend the corresponding multi-floored building and 3) travel at an assigned speed to the evacuation zone. Forty evacuation scenarios, ten for each evacuation zones, were generated at varying times of day, throughout the week. The gathered times were further analyzed with three variables: the student population, the number of buildings holding classes, and the percentage of buildings within the vicinity of an evacuation zone. The student population demonstrated a logarithmic relationship with time, where evacuation time became more consistent as the population sized increased. When it came to the analysis of the number of buildings holding classes, the greater number of buildings, meant the buildings were more spread out and resulted in similar evacuation time for all four evacuation zones. The last case examined the percentage of buildings within the vicinity of an evacuation zone, half of the evacuation zones possessed a linear relationship, where the greater percentages meant a shorter arrival time.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.171 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)Same topicEvacuation and Crowd DynamicsFrench-language works237,207