Integrating Remote Sensing Data And Rapid Appraisals For Land-Cover Change Analyses In Uganda
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rapid population growth, unsustainable land use, and a pervasively degrading landscape are components of a dominant paradigm regarding African development. While recent work articulating the ‘misreading’ of the African landscape have begun to challenge this paradigm, much work remains regarding the pervasiveness and character of this misread. A method is presented for investigating mechanisms of land‐cover change that combines remotely sensed data, archival data, and rapid appraisals in a way less influenced by dominant paradigms. We present a case where increasing human activity is resulting in accumulation of woody biomass on edaphic grasslands of a forest–grassland mosaic, rather than the expansion of grasslands at the expense of forests as is currently understood in that area. These increases in biomass are stimulated by anthropogenic influences that are shaped by institutional and edaphic factors. We do not claim that resources are being pervasively enhanced across sub‐Saharan Africa under conditions of population growth, but that there may be many mechanisms of change, resulting in both degradation and enhancement, occurring simultaneously across sub‐Saharan Africa or even intra‐regionally within a nation under these conditions. The integration and application of these methods serve to improve applied analyses of land‐cover change to better characterize these mechanisms, and avoid the wrong policy prescriptions. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it