MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7066186582

Flood Damages in the Squamish-LilIooet Regional District: A Post-Audit of the 2003 Event

2006· article· en· W7066186582 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDamagesFlood mythFloodplainWork (physics)DikeSetbackEvent (particle physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian flood damages are thought to be increasing and this trend is unlikely to reverse. At present, increased pressure to develop, downloading of responsibility to municipal governments and an aging infrastructure has left British Columbia vulnerable to a catastrophic event. A number of authors have called for more research dedicated to understanding flood damages. This work, despite data limitations, examines the 2003 flood in the Squamish- Lillooet Regional District and aims to inform our limited understanding of floods in B.C. The work makes use of numerous data sources in order to explore a recent event, with particular emphasis on who was affected, what factors influenced damages, the role of dikes and basements and whether the 1976 implementation of land use planning influenced the damages. The work finds that further data would benefit our understanding of the event but that in the mean time provincial floodplain development continues to place people and property at risk. Furthermore, future policies and changes to the decision making process may benefit by moving beyond elevation and setback to include other factors.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.407

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.247 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→