MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7054640955

Application of machine learning methodology to detect the potential for fluvial hazards to occur along river networks

2023· dissertation· en· W7054640955 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Design and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConcordia University
KeywordsFluvialHazardRandom forestScale (ratio)Flooding (psychology)Hydrology (agriculture)Segmentation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluvial hazards of river mobility and flooding are often problematic for road infrastructure and need to be considered in the planning process. The extent of river and road infrastructure networks and their tendency to be close to each other creates a need to be able to identify the most dangerous areas quickly and cost-effectively. In this study we propose a novel methodology utilizing random forest machine learning methods and hydro geomorphic expertise to provide easily interpretable fine scale fluvial hazard predictions for large fluvial networks. The developed tools provided these predictions at reference points every 100 meters along the fluvial network of three watersheds within the province of Quebec, Canada and used variables focused on river conditions and to proxy hydro geomorphic processes such as sediment transport. Training/validation data was collected in four forms: field data, results from hydraulic and erosion models, government infrastructure databases, and hydro geomorphic evaluations using the 1-m DEM and satellite/historical imagery. First a subset of the reference points was manually classified then divided into training (75%) and validation (25%) datasets. Then the training dataset was used to train supervised random forest models. The validation dataset combined with extensive validation indices indicated the models were capable of accurately predicting the potential for hazards to occur. Metrics are extracted from the model to determine which variables are most important to predict each hazard. Finally, a methodology is proposed for a top-down hazard analysis of extensive fluvial networks to identify the most at-risk infrastructure/communities.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicLaser Design and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207