MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774368211 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2017.11.097

Datasets for mapping pastoralist movement patterns and risk zones of Rift Valley fever occurrence

2017· article· en· W2774368211 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gladys Mosomtai, Magnus Evander, Charles Ndegwa Mundia, Per Sandström, Clas Ahlm, Osama Ahmed Hassan, Olivia Wesula Lwande, Moses Karoki Gachari, Tobias Landmann, Rosemary Sang

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Vectors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVetenskapsrådetInternational Development Research CentreStyrelsen för Internationellt Utvecklingssamarbete
KeywordsRift Valley feverLivestockVector (molecular biology)GeographyRift valleyHabitatRange (aeronautics)PastoralismVector controlDistribution (mathematics)Movement controlSpatial distributionCartographyVeterinary medicineEcologyOutbreakBiologyRemote sensingForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

mosquitoes. The data presented in this article propose environmental layers suitable for mapping RVF vector habitat zones and livestock migratory routes. Using species distribution modelling, we used RVF vector occurrence data sampled along livestock migratory routes to identify suitable vector habitats within the study region which is located in the central and the north-eastern part of Kenya. Eleven herds monitored with GPS collars were used to estimate cattle utilization distribution patterns. We used kernel density estimator to produce utilization contours where the 0.5 percentile represents core grazing areas and the 0.99 percentile represents the entire home range. The home ranges were overlaid on the vector suitability map to identify risks zones for possible RVF exposure. Assimilating high spatial and temporal livestock movement and vector distribution datasets generates new knowledge in understanding RVF epidemiology and generates spatially explicit risk maps. The results can be used to guide vector control and vaccination strategies for better disease control.

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)0.000
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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicViral Infections and VectorsFrench-language works237,207