MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990619480 · doi:10.5539/jms.v9n2p128

An Ecological Compensation Model for Liuxi River Basin Based on Emission Rights

2019· article· en· W2990619480 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bole Pan, Haoxuan Tan, Bojun Mao, Yixian Shen, Zhuoyuan Lu, Yongzhang Pan, Wei Zuo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Sustainability · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Conservation and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPer capitaDrainage basinPopulationStructural basinEcologyChinaEnvironmental scienceGeographyWater resource managementGeologySociologyCartographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Researches on standards of ecological compensation will raise awareness of protecting the ecological environment in the basin and maintain the economy’s and society’s sustainable development. This paper constructed an ecological compensation model on the Liuxi River Basin in Guangzhou, China. Data and statistics were acquired from the statistical yearbook in Guangzhou Statistical Information Network, including the total GDP, total wastewater discharge amount and total population of Guangzhou for 13 years (1995, 2000, 2005–2015). Then, SPSS was used to fit the scatter plot of volume of wastewater discharged per capita and GDP per capita, and the most accurate regression equation was selected. Most importantly, an ecological compensation model was constructed based on emission rights and it was then used to calculate the annual eco-compensation fee for Conghua, where the river’s upper part is located. The results showed that the amount of ecological compensation in 2017 was 33.821 billion Chinese Yuan, which should be used to compensate Conghua for the emission rights it had given up for protecting water quality of the Liuxi River. This study provided an effective reference to the government’s decision on continuous improvement of the “Guangzhou Ecological Compensation Plan for Liuxi River Basin”.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and SustainabilitySame topicEnvironmental Conservation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207