Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2505.08202

AI and Generative AI Transforming Disaster Management: A Survey of Damage Assessment and Response Techniques

Aman Raj·Lakshit Arora·Sanjay Surendranath Girija·Shashank Kapoor·Dipen Pradhan·Ankit Shetgaonkar
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Natural disasters, including earthquakes, wildfires and cyclones, bear a huge risk on human lives as well as infrastructure assets. An effective response to disaster depends on the ability to rapidly and efficiently assess the intensity of damage. Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) presents a breakthrough solution, capable of combining knowledge from multiple types and sources of data, simulating realistic scenarios of disaster, and identifying emerging trends at a speed previously unimaginable. In this paper, we present a comprehensive review on the prospects of AI and GenAI in damage assessment for various natural disasters, highlighting both its strengths and limitations. We talk about its application to multimodal data such as text, image, video, and audio, and also cover major issues of data privacy, security, and ethical use of the technology during crises. The paper also recognizes the threat of Generative AI misuse, in the form of dissemination of misinformation and for adversarial attacks. Finally, we outline avenues of future research, emphasizing the need for secure, reliable, and ethical Generative AI systems for disaster management in general. We believe that this work represents the first comprehensive survey of Gen-AI techniques being used in the field of Disaster Assessment and Response.

Explore related subjects

cs.CYcs.AIcs.LG

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Aman Raj, Lakshit Arora, Sanjay Surendranath Girija, Shashank Kapoor, Dipen Pradhan, Ankit Shetgaonkar. 2025-05-13. AI and Generative AI Transforming Disaster Management: A Survey of Damage Assessment and Response Techniques. https://doi.org/10.1109/compsac65507.2025.00251

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

An Investigation Into Secondary School Students' Debugging Behaviour in Python

Background and context: Debugging is a significant and often frustrating challenge for beginner programmers. Understanding students' debugging behaviours and strategies can help to identify common difficulties and inform approaches for alleviating these. Currently, there are limited studies of school students' debugging behaviour in a text-based programming language, a medium through which millions are learning to program. Objectives: In this paper, we investigate the debugging behaviour of 12-14-year-old students learning Python through a lesson-long classroom study. Method: We collected program snapshots from 73 students' attempts at a set of Python debugging exercises in an online code editor. Through qualitative content analysis of these snapshots, we developed a granular categorisation of the changes students made when debugging. Findings: A range of debugging behaviours were exhibited by students, many of which were ineffective. Students added errors through small-scale changes, reverted corrective changes, and repeatedly ran identical programs in quick succession. From the results, we identify four barriers to successful and reliable debugging for students learning a text-based programming language: fragile knowledge, a lack of systematicity and reflection, the syntax barrier, and dynamics of emotions and attitudes. Implications: This paper highlights some of the difficulties that secondary school students have when debugging in Python and the challenges of analysing program snapshots through manual inspection. We recommend that school teachers explicitly teach a systematic approach to debugging and discourage the use of ineffective debugging behaviours, and that programming environments should contain features that facilitate successful debugging.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

Printed but not benchmarkable: most building-decarbonisation disclosure cannot be matched to the pathways that stranding regulation assumes

Cities are beginning to enforce carbon limits on existing buildings. Science-based decarbonisation pathways set those limits one asset type and one jurisdiction at a time. Owners, however, report for the whole firm. We measure what that mismatch costs on two sets of public corporate reports: a census of 502 reports from the 119 listed built-environment firms with a collected report inside a 2,246-firm panel (2003-2023), and 519 real-estate reports from 101 firms (2007-2024). BeDA, a multimodal language-model tool whose reliability we test first, read them. Running the pathway frameworks' own entry tests over published disclosure: 16.5% of census reports (43.7% of real-estate reports) print an operational carbon intensity per square metre; 6.6% (25.0%) can be matched to a pathway for their property type in a covered jurisdiction; and only 5.0% (16.4%) disclose the floor area they divided by. Of the failures at the pathway test, 82-84% follow from reports lumping the portfolio together and 16-18% from a missing curve in the pathway library. The obstacle is the reporting unit, not missing data. The rate is roughly twice as high for European as for US listings (65-71% versus 35% in listed real estate). We also show that a US portfolio's carbon verdict cannot be worked out from disclosure at all. Within one climate zone, the pathway's carbon limit varies by up to 2.79-fold with the electricity subregion, which no report names; its energy limit does not move. Extraction is checked against the source PDFs (97.3% of extracted intensities appear verbatim) and repeats on a second extractor (kappa = 0.97). Recall of the non-disclosing class was 95.1% in a blinded hand audit of 122 reports. The fix follows from the measurement: split intensity by asset type and jurisdiction, and report floor area.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

Incipit: Axiom-Grounded Scaffolding for Human-AI Literary Creation

Large language models can produce fluent prose from short prompts, but a direct interaction gives writers little access to the assumptions that shape a long narrative. We present Incipit, an implemented research prototype that inserts an explicit planning layer between writer intent and generated prose. The layer is grounded in literary axioms, which are curated and reusable propositions about human experience and narrative craft. The prototype connects a knowledge base of 1455 axioms and 472 typed relationships to a five round direction dialogue, a retrieval and selection pipeline, and a three level blueprint covering creative premises, story beats, character arcs, and chapter outlines. Writers can inspect and edit the resulting structures before using them as context for scene generation. Additional modules support real event abstraction and five dimensional diagnostic feedback. We describe the design rationale, data flow, implementation boundaries, and a worked design example. Because no controlled user study or independently rated output study has yet been completed, we do not claim that the system improves literary quality. Instead, we outline a future preregistered comparison designed to distinguish the contribution of axiom grounding from that of hierarchical planning. The paper contributes a concrete architecture for making literary knowledge an inspectable coordination object in human AI writing.

cs.CY↗