Paysage agricole intensif au centre-ouest tunisien : Essai d'une gestion intégrée éco-pommoïcole à Foussana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In countries with arid and semi-arid climate such as Tunisia, the over-exploitation of ground water resources became intolerable, in particular that of the delegation of Foussana located in the mid-west of Tunisia, object of this study. This situation of overexploitation requires the characterization of the agricultural landscape and the characterization of water resources using a Geographical Information System SIG: ArcGis 9.3. The approach followed in this work is articulate on the installation of an agricultural and hydrological database; these plans of information were combined by methods of multicriterion analysis through the software ArcMap 9.3 to produce cards sets of themes which make it possible to describe the agricultural landscape in this area and to represent the hydrological potentialities of Foussana. Spatialization presents one of the best approaches to characterize the landscape of the area. Thus, this work enabled us to traverse the territories while revealing the wealth in water resources which present a factor supporting the differentiation of the agrarian landscapes in a typology of rainfed agriculture (83.4%) and of modernized agriculture (16.5%) requires large amounts of water. The irrigated area accounts 179.6 ha (between cultivations of cereals, arboriculture, truck farming and fodder) in 1980, to attain 4620 ha in 2010, for example the apple orchard landscape very demanding of water factor, which accounts for 50% of arboriculture sector in the study zone.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".