MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2886784030 · doi:10.11159/icepr18.169

Evaluation of Soil Erosion Using 3S Techniques: A Case Study ofCangxi County in the Jialing River Basin, Yangtze River, China

2018· article· en· W2886784030 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yijin Wu, Wenna Tu, Yue Xi, Jing Hu, Chang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on New Technologies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentral China Normal UniversityMinistry of Education, IndiaNatural Science Foundation of Hubei ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsYangtze riverChinaErosionHydrology (agriculture)GeologyStructural basinDrainage basinWater resource managementEnvironmental scienceGeomorphologyArchaeologyGeotechnical engineeringGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soil erosion not only has a negative impact on the ecological environment, but also restricts the sustainable development.Therefore, it's significant to develop green ecology, evaluate soil erosion in large river valley, and propose feasible suggestions of soil and water conservation.This paper uses 3S technology to evaluate soil erosion of Cangxi County in the Jialing River basin, Yangtze River, China.The main steps include: (1)Image pre-processing: using ZY-3 and GF-1 satellite data, both geometric error and radiometric error are corrected so that image accuracy is improved; (2)Field investigation and indoor interpretation of remote sensing: field interpretation marks are established by GPS and RS; mainly image interpretation is carried out by machine learning or image classification, then results are checked by visual interpretation and confirmed by field review to improve interpretation accuracy;(3)Spatial analysis: soil erosion intensity is classified and soil erosion intensity map can be obtained through "standards for classification and gradation of soil erosion"(SL190-2007) based on three factors(land-use types, vegetation coverage and slope); (4)soil erosion evaluation: soil erosion is evaluated by soil erosion intensity map.The results show that: (1)The intensity of soil erosion in the study area is concentrated on slight and moderate soil erosion; the area with severe soil erosion is few; (2)The soil erosion of townships are mainly concentrated on the north and east of the county, while soil erosion is relatively slight in the northwest and southwest; (3)Under the influence of different factors, the soil erosion intensity is quite different and is often affected by many factors(exposed soil, human activities).Finally, this paper proposes some specific measures from the perspective of green ecology, which may provide a view to a certain reference for soil and water conservation in the study area and evaluation of soil erosion in other regions in Yangtze River, China.

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)0.001
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 score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on New Technologies→Same topicSoil erosion and sediment transport→French-language works237,207→