MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900341675 · doi:10.5539/jas.v10n12p294

Spatial Analysis of Forest Fragmentation in the Atlantic Forest Bioma Areas

2018· article· en· W2900341675 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Juliana Marchesan, Rudiney Soares Pereira, Elisiane Alba, Letícia Daiane Pedrali

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsAtlantic forestFragmentation (computing)Forest fragmentationGeographyLandscape ecologyForestryEcologyBiologyBiodiversity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this work was to calculate landscape ecology metrics using the R language, allowing the analysis of forest fragments under the Atlantic Forest domain located in the sub-basin of Arroio Jaquirana, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. For the mapping of the forest fragments, we used images from the REIS/RapidEye sensor dated 2016, and the classification was supervised through the Bhattacharya algorithm. The fragments were analyzed in seven size classes, to separate them and to calculate the landscape metrics it was used R language. The results attained demonstrated that the native forest occupied 34.01% of the study area, covering a total of 1,995 fragments, of which 93.43% were less than 5 ha. The highest values of edge and perimeter-area ratio were found in the small fragments indicating a greater edge effect, with the central areas of these remnants being exposed to the external matrix effects. Thus, it is concluded that the Atlantic Forest is highly fragmented and is extremely important to establish measures to minimize the effects and/or increase the connectivity between the fragments through ecological corridors using the smaller fragments, in addition, it makes necessary the development of public policies and research for the management of the region in order to preserve the remnants.

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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207