MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Significance of Reducing Emissions from Degradation and Deforestation (Redd): Evidence from Study in Terai Region of India

2012· article· en· W4210401207 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Divy Ninad Koul, Pankaj Panwar, Mohammad Moonis, Charan Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Forestry · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeforestation (computer science)Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradationAgroforestryDalbergia sissooUnited Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangeGreenhouse gasClimate changeCarbon sequestrationClimate change mitigationGlobal warmingGeographyForest degradationForestryEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental protectionKyoto ProtocolLand degradationCarbon stockEcologyAgricultureAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) has became a major issue in international climate change negotiations. REDD was first introduced by United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at its 11th session of Conference of Parties (COP) held in Montreal, Canada in December 2005. However, till date a consensus on making REDD practicable and marketable mechanism has not been reached. There are differences between developing countries having rich tropical forest cover. There are issues associated with methodologies, monitoring, internal forest policy, indigenous rights etc. In the present paper efforts were made to demonstrate the significance of natural and existing forests in sequestering and storing carbon. The carbon sequestration and storage potential is much higher in natural forests compared with two plantations viz of Dalbergia sissoo and Terminalia arjuna. But enhancing land area under new forest cover can also be not refuted. Thus conserving natural forest coupled with adding new areas under forest through plantation should be the strategy for reversing and/or reducing global warming and climate change.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndian Journal of ForestrySame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207