MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785991990 · doi:10.6000/1927-5129.2017.13.105

Analysis of Socio-Economic Well-Being of Population in Khirthar National Park, Sindh: A Geographical Study

2017· article· en· W2785991990 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Naila Arshad, Khalida Mahmood, Razzaq Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Basic & Applied Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural risk and resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNational parkGeographyBoundary (topology)SocioeconomicsRural areaPopulationNatural resourceStandard of livingNatural (archaeology)Environmental protectionEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementRegional scienceEcologyDemographySociologyArchaeologyPolitical scienceEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pakistan’s two-third population lives in rural areas where the dependence on natural resources is foremost. National parks are protected areas where the natural environment is preserved for the future generations. The purpose of this study is to investigate the socio-economic aspects of the people living in such areas. For this a comparative study has been designed by selecting two areas of Kirthar National Park (KNP), Sindh, one within the boundary of park; Core and the other at the transition zone of the park. The data have been collected through extensive field survey and analyzed using correlation technique. The study can be helpful in assessing the interaction that exists between humans and dry natural environment. The results indicate a clear difference in the standard of living of the people living in these two selected areas. Such studies are very important from the point of view of rural development of local communities.

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)0.000
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Basic & Applied SciencesSame topicAgricultural risk and resilienceFrench-language works237,207