Effect of Urbanization on Ecosystem Service Values in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Urban Agglomeration of China from 2000 to 2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rapid urbanization has led to the continuous deterioration of the surrounding natural ecosystem. It is important to identify the key urbanization factors that affect ecosystem services and analyze the potential effects of these factors on the ecosystem. We selected the Beijing, Tianjin, and Hebei (BTH) urban agglomeration to investigate these effects, and designed three indicators to map the urbanization level: Population density, gross domestic product (GDP) density, and the construction land proportion. Four indicators were chosen to quantify ecosystem services: Food production, carbon sequestration and oxygen production, water conservation, and soil conservation. To handle the nonlinear interactions, we used a random forest (RF) method to assess the effect of urbanization on ecosystem services in the BTH area from 2000 to 2014. Our study demonstrated that population density and economic growth were the internal driving forces affecting ecosystem services. We observed changing trends in the effect of urbanization: The effect of population density on ecosystem services increased, the effect of the proportion of construction land was consistent with population density, and the effect of GDP density on ecosystem services decreased. Our results suggest that controlling the population and GDP would significantly influence the sustainable development in large urban areas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".