Earthquake risk communication in the capital regional district : a public awareness assessment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oral histories corroborate modern seismological predictions that Vancouver Island and the Pacific Northwest are overdue for a major earthquake, expected to be up to a 9.0 on the Richter scale. Our collective understanding of earthquakes and the risks associated with them have evolved dramatically since the implementation of Canada’s first seismic design provisions in 1941. The Capital Regional District has yet to experience a damaging earthquake in living memory, but research strongly suggests that a large, >7.0 earthquake along the Cascadia fault line is likely in the coming decades. This project used a survey alongside anonymous interviews with key stakeholders to: \n1.\tgauge and enhance public awareness of earthquake risk and response plans \n2.\tidentify areas where disaster preparedness policies may not be achieving their goals \n3.\tdevelop policy recommendations based on project results and internationally analogous communities \nSurvey and interview results show that while some of the existing awareness programs are effective, most residents in the CRD remain unprepared for a damaging earthquake event. Results of this study show that existing earthquake risk communication seemingly fails to properly impress the severity of risk on residents within the Capital Regional District. Policy recommendations do not align with individual preparedness levels within the community – potentially leading to a dangerous situation should an earthquake strike.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it