MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W28214357 · doi:10.1111/mec.14064

Analysis of Terrain Change Caused by Mining Development using GIS

2006· article· en· W28214357 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lee Hyung-Seok

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Korean Society of Surveying Geodesy Photogrammetry and Cartography · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEcology and Conservation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTerrainTriangulated irregular networkRaster graphicsPhotogrammetryPlan (archaeology)Process (computing)Computer scienceVolume (thermodynamics)Elevation (ballistics)Mining engineeringData miningRemote sensingGeologyArtificial intelligenceCartographyGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a need to restore the terrain back its natural environment after mining development. It is necessary to compare the original and developing surfaces for post-management and to analyze the terrain change to develop a process for efficient restoration plan. This study analyzes and compares change to the terrain by annual mining development using GIS. Contours digitized with CAD based on photogrammetry are classified into annual data and created by Triangulated Irregular Network (TIN). By producing profiles and cross sections using TIN, many stations are distinguished. As a result of the terrain changes caused by mining development from 2000 to 2003 by operating elevation values each cell converted to raster from TIN, are cut and are filled up to 46% of cut volume, and annual surface changes of cut and fill area to mining are analyzed to visual and quantitative data. This study is used for the restoration plan and additional mining. And it is expected that this annual change, caused by mining development, can be used to return the terrain close to its original condition for finished mining area.

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)0.001
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Korean Society of Surveying Geodesy Photogrammetry and CartographySame topicEcology and Conservation StudiesFrench-language works237,207