LAND READJUSTMENT POTENTIALITY: CONNOTATION AND EVALUATION METHODOLOGY
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
In China's land use practice, land readjustment has contributed a lot in realizing the rational disposition of land resource and in improving the land use efficiency and the ecological environment. Meanwhile, Land readjustment has caught increasingly concern within land use literature. Regarding land readjustment, one of the essential contents should be the potentiality of land readjustment, upon which land arrangement plan can be plotted. However, so far as the theoretical and empirical researches in China's mainland, few discuss on the connotation and evaluation methodology of land readjustment potentiality. Based on the review of land readjustment potentiality abroad, it is argued that the connotation of land arrangement potentiality can be defined in three respects as increasing useable land area, improving land productivity and advancing ecological environment. Furthermore, evaluation methodologies with special attention to rural land arrangement are introduced, which is expected to shed new light on relevant researches.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.021 | 0.001 |
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