MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040604250 · doi:10.1016/j.proenv.2010.10.121

Integration of water replenishment and pollutant reduction to achieve ecological restoration goals based on sustainability of the lacustrine wetlands

2010· article· en· W2040604250 on OpenAlexaff
Boli Hu, Yunsheng Ruan, Xiaoyue Xu, Kexin Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia Environmental Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWetlandSustainabilityPollutantEnvironmental scienceRestoration ecologyEcologyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental planningWater resource managementBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Successful wetland restoration is frequently constrained by the absence of persistent attention to the whole remedial process. The paper put forward a holistic method to restore the lacustrine wetland ecosystem. Yilong Lake wetland, one of the nine largest lakes of the Yun-Gui Plateau in China, was used as a case study. A modified (Pressure-State-Response) PSR model was presented to establish a comprehensive indicator system and to explain the ecological sustainability. Ecosystem sustainability and water quality were set as the general restoration target and the constraint restoration target, respectively, that makes the restoration goals not only contains the whole ecosystem but also the key individual parts. Two restoration goals (high and low) were set based on the cluster analysis of the historical data from 1952 to 2006. Different restoration levels give the decision makers and managers flexible options to restore the ecosystem based on the actual demand and practical capacity. Three restoration scenarios about the water replenishment and pollutant reduction were set to improve the ecological condition. The results showed that the integrated restoration measures according to water quantity and water quality can feasibly achieve the prescribed restoration levels. The paper gives the decision makers a holistic method to solve problems in lacustrine wetland restoration process.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia Environmental SciencesSame topicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamicsFrench-language works237,207