Seismic landslide hazard mapping for Greater Vancouver, British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The lower Mainland of southwest British Columbia (BC) hosts about 3.5 million people and significant infrastructures of national importance. Southwestern BC has the highest seismic risk in Canada with significant potential to cause earthquake-induced hazards including tsunamis, liquefaction and landslides. A Cascadia mega-thrust (MW 9) earthquake is predicted to generate $75 billion Canadian dollars in losses. This damage can be resulted from ground shaking or its secondary phenomena like landslides; ground shaking during earthquakes may trigger landslides that can damage or destroy buildings, bury roads and highways and kill and injure people. In Canada, during the past century and a half, landslides have caused more fatality than all other natural hazards combined.\nSeismic hazard mapping for landslides integrates topographic, geotechnical and seismological information to develop the earthquake-induced slope displacements map which is indicator of seismic landslide potential. In this study we use a pseudo-probabilistic Newmark displacement analyses for regional landslide susceptibility mapping and its application will be illustrated with developing earthquake induced landslide hazard map for the quadrangle in Greater Vancouver area. The predicted displacements are assigned to the defined grids to come up with the final seismic landslide hazard map. The seismic landslide hazard map predicts very low hazard level (displacementcm) for the selected region which is in agreement with the observations in our field survey in July 2018 where no signs of deformation were recorded (e.g. cracks, settlements, previous landslides, scarps).
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".