MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214878555 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.160608

Production-Living-Ecology Nexus of Land-Use Functions in the Mountainous Areas: A Case Study of Chongqing, China

2021· article· en· W3214878555 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhou Xiangmei, Xingyu Liu, Xinyi Fu, Hongsheng Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaChongqing Postdoctoral Science Foundation
KeywordsGeographyLand useEnvironmental resource managementDriving factorsSustainable developmentChinaDistribution (mathematics)Environmental planningEcologyEnvironmental scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the basis of land resource allocation and land use planning, land-use functions (LUFs) are important indicators for evaluating the sustainable development of land and environments. It is essential to evaluate the LUFs of a specific area from the perspective of land-use comprehensive functions. This paper takes 38 districts and counties in Chongqing, China, as an example to construct a state-space model from three aspects, production factors, living factors, and ecological factors, which affect the functions of land resources. The paper continues to construct an evaluation index system and determine indicators by entropy methods to calculate and evaluate the spatial differentiation of land-use functions in Chongqing. The results show that the value of land-use multi-functions in Chongqing can be divided into three levels. The results are characterized by the gradual weakening of the main urban area and the polarization effect is strong. The distribution characteristics of this result are caused by the differences in traffic conditions, geographical location, the quality of natural conditions, economic levels, planning policies, etc. In the end, this paper proposes relative suggestions for the facet of eco-friendly production and development to strengthen future policy guidance. Future studies can continue to improve the index system and study the spatio-temporal effects of LUFs from a microscopic perspective to make the results more accurate.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.264
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.243
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 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207