MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7113506285

Mega Quakes: Cascading Earthquake Hazards and Compounding Risks

2018· book· en· W7113506285 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueBristol Research (University of Bristol) · 2018
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)HazardRisk assessmentNatural hazardRisk managementHazard analysisMegacityVulnerability assessment
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-scale earthquake hazards pose major threats to modern society, generating casualties, disrupting socioeconomic activities, and causing enormous economic loss across the world. Events, such as the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami and the 2011 Tohoku earthquake, highlighted the vulnerability of urban cities to catastrophic earthquakes. Accurate assessment of earthquake-related hazards (both primary and secondary) is essential to mitigate and control disaster risk exposure effectively. To date, various approaches and tools have been developed in different disciplines. However, they are fragmented over a number of research disciplines and underlying assumptions are often inconsistent. Our society and infrastructure are subjected to multiple types of cascading earthquake hazards; therefore, integrated hazard assessment and risk management strategy is needed for mitigating potential consequences due to multi-hazards. Moreover, uncertainty modeling and its impact on hazard prediction and anticipated consequences are essential parts of probabilistic earthquake hazard and risk assessment. The Research Topic is focused upon modeling and impact assessment of cascading earthquake hazards, including mainshock ground shaking, aftershock, tsunami, liquefaction, and landslide.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.012

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBristol Research (University of Bristol)Same topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207