MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7015864398

A web application for rapid seismic risk assessment

2019· other· en· W7015864398 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueEspace ÉTS (ETS) · 2019
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Resources CanadaPublic Safety Canada
KeywordsWeb applicationRisk assessmentSeismic riskRisk managementField (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerous computer models have been developed for seismic loss analyses at urban and regional scales.They seem, however, ill-suited to custom application to the specific Canadian hazard and exposure settings and, more importantly, inadequate for utilization by the broader non-expert public safety community.Therefore, communication of the potential seismic risk results to local stakeholders, such that they can properly understand their exposure and vulnerability, represents an outstanding challenge.The objective of the present study is to describe the methodological background and ongoing development activities of the Rapid Risk Evaluator (ER2), a relatively rapid and user-friendly risk assessment application, developed to overcome the current communication barriers between risk experts and decision makers.Developing ER2 included: pre-computing site-specific databases containing ground motion scenarios, prediction of potential attenuation with distance and local site amplification, a standardized inventories of buildings' structural properties and occupancy categories, and assessment of the seismic vulnerability using hazard-compatible vulnerability functions.These functions correlate directly the intensity of the seismic shaking to the probability of damage and direct economic and social losses.This approach allows for conducting risk scenarios in large urban centers within minutes.The above approach was programmed into an easy to run web-application.Equipped with graphic user interface, ER2 allows non-expert users to run otherwise complex seismic risk scenarios through a simple intuitive selection process.An example of ER2 applied to a hypothetical earthquake event in Quebec City is included to illustrate the simplicity of the user interface and capabilities of the application.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.300
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3000.232

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.275 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueEspace ÉTS (ETS)French-language works237,207