Priority Areas for Mangrove Conservation to Support Disaster Mitigation Efforts in Pacitan Bay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mangrove ecosystems at the estuary of Teleng River, Pacitan Bay, call for preservation, protection, and development as a natural vegetative defense against tsunami impacts. Limited availability of potential land for mangrove growth poses a challenge to sustainable mangrove management. To anticipate land acquisition for another use, it is necessary to study land suitability for mangrove and mangrove conservation priorities in the Pacitan Bay. The land suitability parameters consisted of landform, slope, soil texture, and tidal fluctuation, while the mangrove conservation priority was determined based on several aspects: mangrove land cover reduction, mangrove damage level, beach ridge and riparian zone, and land suitability. The results indicate that lands with high potential for mangroves are distributed along Teleng and Grindulu Rivers but not precisely at the estuary. Based on the suitability results, highly potential and potential lands are proposed for mangrove planting, while existing mangroves are for protection and preservation zones, especially on the sides where relatively young mangroves grow for their roots are not strong enough to withstand river currents.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".