MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216153088 · doi:10.3390/rs13234872

What Is the Impact of Tectonic Plate Movement on Country Size? A Long-Term Forecast

2021· article· en· W3216153088 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kamil Maciuk, Michał Apollo, Anita Kukulska‐Kozieł, Paulina Lewińska

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAkademia Górniczo-Hutnicza im. Stanislawa StaszicaYork UniversityUniwersytet Pedagogiczny im. Komisji Edukacji Narodowej w KrakowieUniwersytet Rolniczy im. Hugona Kołłątaja w Krakowie
KeywordsTectonicsPlate tectonicsGeologyLand areaTerm (time)LithosphereGeographySeismologyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Earth’s surface is under permanent alteration with the area of some nations growing or shrinking due to natural or man-made processes, for example sea level change. Here, based on the NUVEL 1A model, we forecast (in 10, 25, and 50 years) the changes in area for countries that are located on the border of the major tectonic plates. In the analysis we identify countries that are projected to gain or lose land due to the tectonic plate movement only. Over the next 50 years, the global balance of area gains (0.4 km2) and losses (12.7 km2) is negative. Thus, due to the movements of lithospheric plates, the land surface of the Earth will decrease by 12 km2 in 50 years. Overall, the changes are not that spectacular, as in the case of changes in sea/water levels, but in some smaller countries, projected losses exceed a few thousand square metres a year, e.g., in Nepal the losses exceed 10,000 m2 year−1. Methodologically, this paper finds itself between metric analysis and essay, trying to provoke useful academic discussion and incite educators’ interests to illustrate to students the tectonic movement and its force. Limitations of the used model have been discussed in the methodology section.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.253
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207