MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947810294 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v12n3p159

Decision Support System Module for Sustainable Land Development for Thailand: A Case of Chonburi Province

2019· article· en· W2947810294 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pisase Senawongse, Apisit Eiumnoh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKing Mongkut's Institute of Technology LadkrabangMahidol University
KeywordsBusinessLand information systemLand useSustainable developmentEnvironmental resource managementLand managementRSSLegislationGeographic information systemDecision support systemThe InternetComputer scienceGeographyWorld Wide WebRemote sensingEconomicsCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A decision support system (DSS) module for sustainable land development for Thailand: A case of Chonburi province was developed for decision makers based on available geographic information databases and overlaying techniques available on an internet network. Chonburi province in the Southeast Coast of Thailand was assigned as a special economic development zone or Eastern Economic Corridor (EEC) is a fast growing area for industrial and infrastructure developments causing land use conflicts between privates and governments that were observed elsewhere. Databases including administrative boundary, land resources, land uses, national policies and legislation aspects were integrated for land suitability, condition and limitation for land developments. The system employed ArcGIS Geo-processing service module available on the Central Relation Database that can be accessed via Web Services and RSS. The decision makers could access from the Web Browser and make decision under three conditions, by screening areas for specific land use types, analyzing land use limitations and conditions or for maximum land use benefits. The developed DSS module on land resources spatial analysis and legislation limitations would be a simple technological tool to preliminary and fast selection of proper land managements in the future and would be able to apply in other parts of the country.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicGeographic Information Systems StudiesFrench-language works237,207