MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1815391834 · doi:10.1016/j.ancene.2015.09.004

Land system science and sustainable development of the earth system: A global land project perspective

2015· article· en· W1815391834 on OpenAlexaff
Peter H. Verburg, N. D. Crossman, Erle C. Ellis, Andreas Heinimann, Patrick Hostert, Ole Mertz, Harini Nagendra, Thomas Sikor, Karl‐Heinz Erb, Nancy E. Golubiewski, Ricardo Grau, J. Morgan Grove, Souleymane Konaté, Patrick Meyfroidt, Dawn C. Parker, Rinku Roy Chowdhury, Hideaki Shibata, Allison M. Thomson, Lin Zhen

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropocene · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersEuropean CommissionCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganisationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEarth system scienceEnvironmental resource managementLand managementLand useEnvironmental planningSustainable land managementSustainable developmentStakeholderSystems scienceGeographyEnvironmental scienceEcologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceEngineeringCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Land systems are the result of human interactions with the natural environment. Understanding the drivers, state, trends and impacts of different land systems on social and natural processes helps to reveal how changes in the land system affect the functioning of the socio-ecological system as a whole and the tradeoff these changes may represent. The Global Land Project has led advances by synthesizing land systems research across different scales and providing concepts to further understand the feedbacks between social-and environmental systems, between urban and rural environments and between distant world regions. Land system science has moved from a focus on observation of change and understanding the drivers of these changes to a focus on using this understanding to design sustainable transformations through stakeholder engagement and through the concept of land governance. As land use can be seen as the largest geo-engineering project in which mankind has engaged, land system science can act as a platform for integration of insights from different disciplines and for translation of knowledge into action.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations597
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropoceneSame topicSustainable Agricultural Systems AnalysisFrench-language works237,207