SpringerLink
Log in

Case-Based Reasoning for Disaster Management: Structure Design for Cascading Disasters Case Base

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience

  • 728 Accesses

Abstract

With the acceleration of urbanization and changes in the human living environment, disaster mode has become more and more complex, for example, successive or concurrent disasters. In particular, the chain effect of disaster increases the difficulty of emergency response. It requests a new requirement on case base structure design to adapt cascading disasters. By summarizing and improving our previous study, a relatively complete case base structure for cascading disasters is proposed. In this chapter, we call it “cascading disasters case pedigree (CDCP)” as a novel concept for improving current emergency case base. CDCP consists of longitudinal and horizontal dimension based on biological classification and evolution. Specifically, longitudinal dimension classifies disaster scenarios considering urban environment, hazard, and hazard-affected object and severity. Horizontal dimension describes disaster context evolution from the chain perspective. The relationship between the two dimensions is also discussed. We find that CDCP can fit the special structure of cascading disasters case and reorganize all the source cases in a holistic framework. With the support of CDCP, emergency decision-makers can design specific cascading disasters case base for their cities. It is convenient to store and manage cascading disasters cases and can improve case-based reasoning (CBR) to a great extent.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
EUR 29.95
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
EUR 117.69
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
EUR 160.49
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
EUR 160.49
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aamodt, A., & Plaza, E. (1994). Case-based reasoning: Foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches. AI Communications, 7(1), 39–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alcaraz, C., & Zeadally, S. (2015). Critical infrastructure protection: Requirements and challenges for the 21st century. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, 8, 53–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, D. E. (2005). Towards the development of a standard in emergency planning. Disaster Prevention and Management, 14(2), 158–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, D. E. (2013). Emergency and disaster planning. In A. López-Carresi, M. Fordham, B. Wisner, I. Kelman, & J. C. Gaillard (Eds.), Disaster management: international lessons in risk reduction, response and recovery (pp. 125–141). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, D. E. (2016). How to write an emergency plan. Dunedin Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amailef, K., & Lu, J. (2013). Ontology-supported case-based reasoning approach for intelligent m-government emergency response services. Decision Support Systems, 55(1), 79–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S. (2008). Top billing for platypus at end of evolution tree. Nature, 453(7192), 138–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casti, J. L. (2001). Risk, natural disasters, and complex system theory. Complexity, 7(2), 11–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. John Murray.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eslamian, S., Parvizi, S., & Behnassi, M. (2021). New frameworks for building resilience in hazard management, Chapter 5. In S. Eslamian & F. Eslamian (Eds.), Handbook of disaster risk reduction for resilience: Vol. 1, New frameworks for building resilience to disasters. Springer Nature Switzerland.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, W. C., Liu, Y., & Weng, W. G. (2009). Triangle framework and “4+1” methodology for public security science and technology. Science & Technology Review, 6, 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fan, W. C., Liu, Y., Weng, W. G., & Shen, S. F. (2013). Introduction to public safety science. Science Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnie, G., & Sun, Z. H. (2003). R5 model for case-based reasoning. Knowledge-Based Systems, 16(1), 59–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • General Administration of Quality Supervision & Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China (GAQSIQ), & Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China (SA). (2016). Classification and coding for natural disaster exposure (GB/T 32572–2016).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, J. C., & Malamud, B. D. (2016). Hazard interactions and interaction networks (cascades) within multi-hazard methodologies. Earth System Dynamics, 7(3), 659–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goh, Y. M., & Chua, D. K. H. (2009). Case-based reasoning for construction hazard identification: Case representation and retrieval. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 135(11), 1181–1189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helbing, D. (2013). Globally networked risks and how to respond. Nature, 497(7447), 51–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Komendantova, N., Mrzyglocki, R., Mignan, A., Khazai, B., Wenzel, F., Patt, A., & Fleming, K. (2014). Multi-hazard and multi-risk decision-support tools as a part of participatory risk governance: Feedback from civil protection stakeholders. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 8, 50–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laugé, A., Hernantes, J., & Sarriegi, J. M. (2015). Critical infrastructure dependencies: A holistic, dynamic and quantitative approach. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, 8, 16–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, B. Y., Siu, Y. L., & Mitchell, G. (2016). Hazard interaction analysis for multi-hazard risk assessment: A systematic classification based on hazard-forming environment. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 16(2), 629–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X., Zhang, L. B., Zhang, W. J., & Tu, Y. L. (2009). Critical infrastructure and its safety management. Journal of Management Sciences in China, 12(6), 107–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y., Liu, Y., & Zhang, H. (2014). Research on key scientific questions and interdisciplinary integration methods of unconventional emergency management. China Emergency Management, 1, 10–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, F. (2007). Cascading disaster models in postburn flash flood. Proceedings of the fire environment—innovations, management, and policy, pp. 443–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, E., & Bock, W. J. (2002). Classifications and other ordering systems. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research, 40(4), 169–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mileti, D., & Henry, A. J. (1999). Disasters by design: A reassessment of natural hazards in the United States. Joseph Henry Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, R. W., & Quarantelli, E. L. (2004). What is a disaster? New answers to old questions. Xlibris Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pescaroli, G., & Alexander, D. E. (2015). A definition of cascading disasters and cascading effects: Going beyond the “toppling dominos” metaphor. GRF Davos Planet@Risk, 3(1), 58–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pescaroli, G., & Alexander, D. E. (2016). Critical infrastructure, panarchies and the vulnerability paths of cascading disasters. Natural Hazards, 82(1), 175–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pescaroli, G., & Alexander, D. E. (2018). Understanding compound, interconnected, interacting, and cascading risks: A holistic framework. Risk Analysis, 38(11), 2245–2257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pescaroli, G., Turner, S., Gould, T., Alexander, D. E., & Wicks, R. T. (2017). Cascading effects and escalations in wide-area power failures: A summary for emergency planners, UCL IRDR and London Resilience Special Report 2017–01, Institute for Risk and Disaster Reduction, University College London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, K., Buzna, L., & Helbing, D. (2008). Modelling of cascading effects and efficient response to disaster spreading in complex networks. International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, 4(1/2), 46–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qiu, J. N., Shi, H. Y., & Wang, Y. Z. (2009). Event chain-based knowledge navigation model. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 17(1), 138–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qiu, J. N., Wang, Z. Q., Ye, X., Liu, L. L., & Dong, L. L. (2014). Modeling method of cascading crisis events based on merging Bayesian Network. Decision Support Systems, 62, 94–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rinaldi, S. M., Peerenboom, J. P., & Kelly, T. K. (2001). Identifying, understanding, and analyzing critical infrastructure interdependencies. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, 21(6), 11–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rong, L. L., & Zhang, J. Y. (2012). Research on different evolution models of emergency. Journal of Natural Disasters, 21(3), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schank, R. C. (1982). Dynamic memory: A theory of reminding and learning in computers and people. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding: An inquiry into human knowledge structures. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • She, L., & Huang, C. (2015). Construction and evaluation of the emergency case base. Journal of University Electronic Science and Technology of China (Social Sciences Edition), 17(6), 24–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi, P. J. (1991). Theory and practice of disaster study. Journal of Nan**g University (Natural Sciences), 11, 37–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi, P. J. (1996). Second discussion on theory and practice of disaster study. Journal of Natural Disasters, 5(4), 6–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi, P. J. (2002). Third discussion on theory and practice of disaster study. Journal of Natural Disasters, 11(3), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi, P. J. (2005). Fourth discussion on theory and practice of disaster study. Journal of Natural Disasters, 14(6), 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, A. N., Gupta, M. P., & Ojha, A. (2014). Identifying critical infrastructure sectors and their dependencies: An Indian scenario. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, 7(2), 71–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, Z. H., Finnie, G., & Weber, K. (2004). Case base building with similarity relations. Information Sciences, 165(1–2), 21–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The State Council of China. (2014). Notice on adjusting the division criterion of urban size. http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/content/2014–11/20/content_9225.htm

  • Tomer, A., & Schach, S. R. (2000). The evolution tree: A maintenance-oriented software development model. Proceedings of the 4th European conference on software maintenance and reengineering, 209–214, Zurich, Switzerland.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2006). National planning scenarios. USDHS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J. X., Gu, X. Y., & Huang, T. R. (2013). Using Bayesian networks in analyzing powerful earthquake disaster chains. Natural Hazards, 68(2), 509–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y. X., Li, X. Y., & Xu, L. (2012). Fuzzy rules reasoning method in emergency context reconstruction. System Engineering - Theory & Practice, 32(5), 954–962.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, B. S. (1986). Methodology in biosystematics. Nature Magazine, 9(2), 113-118+107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, L. F., Meng, X. W., & Xu, X. G. (2014). Natural hazard chain research in China: A review. Natural Hazards, 70(2), 1631–1659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xue, L., & Zhong, K. B. (2005). Classification of types, levels and stages for emergencies: Managerial foundation of government emergency response system. China Public Administration, 2, 102–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xue, Y. W., Huang, H., Zhang, G. F., & Zhang, P. Z. (2013). A study on improvised decision-making under serious emergency. Journal of Systems & Management, 22(5), 708–714.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, F., & Li, X. Y. (2017). Complex emergency case representation method based on genetic structure. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 37(3), 677–690.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, F., & Li, X. Y. (2018). Improving emergency response to cascading disasters: Applying case-based reasoning towards urban critical infrastructure. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 30, 244–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, F., Li, X. Y., & Han, X. S. (2018). Risk response for urban water supply network using case-based reasoning during a natural disaster. Safety Science, 106, 121–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, F., Li, X. Y., & Sun, Q. Y. (2015). Design of the emergency case pedigree for scenario response. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 35(10), 2596–2605.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, H., & Liu, Y. (2012). Key problems on fundamental science and technology integration in “scenario-response” based national emergency response platform system. System Engineering - Theory & Practice, 32(5), 947–953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Z. L., Li, X. Y., & Li, H. Y. (2015). A quantitative approach for assessing the critical nodal and linear elements of a railway infrastructure. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, 8, 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant numbers 71904121, 71974128, 91746207); China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (grant number 2019M661531); and the Ministry of Education of China (grant number 19JZD022).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of International and Public Affairs, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China

    Feng Yu

  2. School of Management, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China

    **angyang Li

Authors
  1. Feng Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. **angyang Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran

    Saeid Eslamian

  2. McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Faezeh Eslamian

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Yu, F., Li, X. (2022). Case-Based Reasoning for Disaster Management: Structure Design for Cascading Disasters Case Base. In: Eslamian, S., Eslamian, F. (eds) Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72196-1_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation