MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001832800 · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-14386-x

Global projections of future urban land expansion under shared socioeconomic pathways

2020· article· en· W3001832800 on OpenAlexaff
Guangzhao Chen, Xia Li, Xiaoping Liu, Yimin Chen, Xun Liang, Jiye Leng, Xiaocong Xu, Weilin Liao, Yuean Qiu, Qianlian Wu, Kangning Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsGeographyLand useChinaSocioeconomic statusUrban planningPopulationEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceEcologyEnvironmental healthBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite its small land coverage, urban land and its expansion have exhibited profound impacts on global environments. Here, we present the scenario projections of global urban land expansion under the framework of the shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs). Our projections feature a fine spatial resolution of 1 km to preserve spatial details. The projections reveal that although global urban land continues to expand rapidly before the 2040s, China and many other Asian countries are expected to encounter substantial pressure from urban population decline after the 2050s. Approximately 50-63% of the newly expanded urban land is expected to occur on current croplands. Global crop production will decline by approximately 1-4%, corresponding to the annual food needs for a certain crop of 122-1389 million people. These findings stress the importance of governing urban land development as a key measure to mitigate its negative impacts on food production.

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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.250
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 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

Citations853
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207