ArticleScientific reports2025
A probabilistic GIS-based framework for urban flood risk assessment in Chengdu metro network.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Urban metro network is highly vulnerable to flooding, yet most existing risk assessments rely on deterministic weighting methods that inadequately address uncertainty. To address this limitation, this study develops a probabilistic GIS-based flood risk assessment framework that integrates the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) with its Monte Carlo extension (MC-AHP). Unlike conventional studies, the framework (i) explicitly quantifies uncertainty in expert judgments through β-PERT simulations, (ii) incorporates a comprehensive indicator system covering hazard, exposure, and vulnerability-including passenger flow and under-construction lines often overlooked in prior work, and (iii) provides spatially explicit risk mapping for both operational and planned infrastructure. Application to the Chengdu metro network reveals a concentric flood risk distribution, with the central urban core exhibiting the highest vulnerability despite moderate hazard levels. Compared to AHP, MC-AHP identifies a greater proportion of high-risk areas and provides probability distributions of indicator weights, thereby reducing the influence of subjective bias. Validation against historical flood events confirms the framework's predictive reliability. By explicitly incorporating uncertainty and extending analysis to planned infrastructure, this study advances the methodological rigor of urban flood risk assessment and provides generalizable insights for strengthening metro network resilience worldwide in the face of accelerating climate change and rapid urbanization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.