MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2725266491 · doi:10.25103/jestr.102.09

Effect of Plant Community Structure and Road Greenbelt Width on PM2.5 Concentration

2017· article· en· W2725266491 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Science and Technology Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersMinistry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceShrubDaytimeMorningAtmospheric sciencesEnvironmental engineeringEcologyBotanyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Road greenbelts can reduce the concentration of airborne fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ). This effect is highly sensitive to the community structure of vegetation and greenbelt widths. To determine the optimal community structure and appropriate greenbelt width, PM 2.5 concentrations were tested in four greenbelts with arbor-shrub-grass and arbor-grass plant communities of different greenbelt widths (0, 5, 10, 15, and 20 m) in Suzhou Industrial Park. The daily change law of PM 2.5 concentration and the effects of community structure and greenbelt width on the reduction of PM 2.5 concentration were analyzed. Results demonstrated that the road greenbelts significantly reduced the PM 2.5 concentration. The PM 2.5 concentration in the road greenbelts was low in the morning and evening. At daytime, the PM 2.5 concentration in the arbor-shrub-grass community showed two peaks and one valley, and the PM 2.5 concentration in the arbor-grass community presented a single peak. The PM 2.5 reduction rate of the greenbelts significantly increased with the increase in greenbelt width. However, the reduction rate decreased gradually when the greenbelt width exceeded 15 m. The greenbelts with different community structures reduced the PM 2.5 concentration to different extents. When the greenbelt was narrow ( 5 m), the arbor-shrub-grass community achieved a high average PM 2.5 reduction rate. When the greenbelt was wide (5 m to 20 m), the arbor-grass community reduced the PM 2.5 concentration significantly. When the greenbelt width exceeded 20 m, the arbor-shrub-grass community with reasonable allocation reduced the PM 2.5 concentration more than the arbor-grass community did. The effects of road greenbelt width and plant community on PM 2.5 concentration were discussed simultaneously for the first time in this study.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.289 · 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