MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098576475 · doi:10.5539/esr.v4n1p61

Fundamental Study on Assessment of Soil Erosion by the USLE Method at Rehabilitation Area in Indonesian Coal Mine

2015· article· en· W2098576475 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Naoya Inoue, Akihiro Hamanaka, Hideki Shimada, Takashi Sasaoka, Kikuo Matsui

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Science Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater and Watershed Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsUniversal Soil Loss EquationErosionTopsoilRehabilitationEnvironmental scienceSoil lossCoal miningHydrology (agriculture)Soil scienceEnvironmental engineeringWater resource managementGeotechnical engineeringCoalEngineeringSoil waterGeologyWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mining operation of open cut mines gives serious impacts on the surrounding environments. Therefore, an appropriate rehabilitation program has to be taken into consideration. Soil erosion is one of the major environmental problems in open cut mines in tropical regions. The soil erosion leads to unsuccessful rehabilitation due to topsoil losses. In order to succeed rehabilitation, the condition of soil erosion in the rehabilitation area has to be predicted accurately. As one of an efficient method for prediction of soil loss, Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) is the most widely used method of predicting soil loss in forestry. However, when considering the application of this equation in rehabilitation area, a sufficient consideration is needed because the condition of these areas is very different from that of forestry. This paper describes the reliability to predict soil erosion in rehabilitation area by means of USLE, and discusses the several considerations on soil erosion.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth Science ResearchSame topicGroundwater and Watershed AnalysisFrench-language works237,207