MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330063084 · doi:10.1021/es401344h

Nitrogen Footprint in China: Food, Energy, and Nonfood Goods

2013· article· en· W2330063084 on OpenAlexaff
Baojing Gu, Allison M. Leach, Lin Ma, James N. Galloway, Scott X. Chang, Ying Ge, Jie Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFootprintPer capitaEcological footprintEnvironmental scienceCarbon footprintProduction (economics)Agricultural economicsNatural resource economicsEconomicsGeographySustainabilityMicroeconomicsBiologyEcologyGreenhouse gasEnvironmental healthPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nitrogen (N) footprint is a novel approach to quantify losses to the environment of reactive N (Nr; all species of N except N2) derived from human activities. However, current N footprint models are difficult to apply to new countries due to the large data requirement, and sources of Nr included in calculating the N footprint are often incomplete. In this study, we comprehensively quantified the N footprint in China with an N mass balance approach. Results show that the per capita N footprint in China increased 68% between 1980 and 2008, from 19 to 32 kg N yr(-1). The Nr loss from the production and consumption of food was the largest component of the N footprint (70%) while energy and nonfood products made up the remainder in approximately equal portion in 2008. In contrast, in 1980, the food-related N footprint accounted for 86% of the overall N footprint, followed by nonfood products (8%) and energy (6%). The findings and methods of this study are generally comparable to that of the consumer-based analysis of the N-Calculator. This work provides policy makers quantitative information about the sources of China's N footprint and demonstrates the significant challenges in reducing Nr loss to the environment.

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)0.000
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 score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations141
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207