MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2370295113

The spatio-temporal evolution characteristics of landscape fragmentation for Xining City in recent 15 years

2014· article· en· W2370295113 on OpenAlexaff
Yuena Meng

Bibliographic record

VenueGanhanqu ziyuan yu huanjing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicRemote Sensing and Land Use
Canadian institutionsScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFragmentation (computing)Arable landWoodlandGeographyLand usePhysical geographyCultivated landLand use, land-use change and forestryRemote sensingGrasslandLand coverForestryEcologyArchaeologyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spatiotemporal evolution processes of land use dynamic change and landscape fragmentation change in Xining city were quantitatively analyzed through dynamic attitude,landscape index in this paper. The analysis used three phases of Landsat remote sensing image of 1995,2003,2010 for information source,and Erdas9. 2, Fragstats3. 3 and SPSS16. 0 software were used. The results showed that:( 1) In study area,construction land and woodland continued to grow,net growthes were 4068. 09hm2and 1473. 39hm2respectively for 15 years,cultivated land and bare land continued to decrease,net dereases were 4058. 28hm2and 1481. 85hm2respectively.( 2) The land use dynamics were significant differences among the landscape type stages. In 1995-2003,the construction land,woodland,arable land,bare land and water dynamic degcees were 4. 93%,2. 44%,4. 00%,1. 54% and0. 02% respectively; In 20032010,they were 2. 85%,0. 56 %,2. 38%,3. 17% and0. 02%.( 3) land landscape fragmentation degree intensified for the past 15 years in study area,but the phase difference between the 19952003 and 20032010 was fairely great,It showed that the dominant patchbased construction land and other landscape types did not balancet.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGanhanqu ziyuan yu huanjingSame topicRemote Sensing and Land UseFrench-language works237,207