MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mapping Plastic Greenhouses With LANDSAT 8 Imagery in Valparaiso, Chile

2021· book-chapter· en· W4200154574 on OpenAlexaff
Ignacio Aguirre, Jacinto Garrido Velarde, Javier Lozano‐Parra

Bibliographic record

VenuePractice, progress, and proficiency in sustainability · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubsidyGreenhouseGeographyAgricultureCensusGovernment (linguistics)Intersection (aeronautics)Food securityCartographyAgricultural economicsPhysical geographyPolitical scienceHorticultureArchaeologyEconomicsDemographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the last decades there has been a strong increase around the world in the use of plastic greenhouses (PGs). The Valparaíso region, in the central valley of Chile, has not been the exception, and the area covered by greenhouses has also experienced an increase over the years, reaching 1180 ha in 2007. Taking into account that agriculture in this region employs more than 60,000 people and accounts for 4% of the regional GDP, this information should be available to be included in territorial planning and incorporated into hydrological, economic, and food security models. To do this, the authors propose a new method for identifying the surface covered by PGs based on the intersection of the normalized difference indices and the areas excluded by the masks. The results showed that this methodology was able to identify with a general precision of 86.25% which allowed to classify 1409.85 ha. This area is consistent with the agricultural census carried out in 2007 and with the increase of more than 900 subsidies granted by the government for the installation of new structures.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.242
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 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePractice, progress, and proficiency in sustainabilitySame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207