MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283013738 · doi:10.30564/jees.v4i2.4687

Vegetation Changes in Alberta Oil Sands, Canada, Based on Remotely Sensed Data from 1995 to 2020

2022· article· en· W4283013738 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jixin He, Debo Chen, Ye Zhan, Chao Liu, Ruichen Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental & Earth Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVegetation (pathology)TailingsNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexOil sandsEnvironmental scienceSand miningVegetation coverLand usePhysical geographyLand coverScale (ratio)Hydrology (agriculture)Mining engineeringRemote sensingGeographyGeologyClimate changeArchaeologyCartographyCivil engineeringGeotechnical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are rich oil and gas resources in Alberta oil sand mining area in Canada. In the 1960s, the Canadian government decided to increase the mining intensity. However, the exploitation will bring many adverse effects. In recent years, more people pay attention to the environmental protection and ecological restoration of mining areas, such as issues related to changes in vegetated lands. Thus, the authors used the Landsat-5 TM and Landsat-8 OLI remote sensing images as the basic data sources, and obtained the land cover classification maps from 1995 to 2020 by ENVI. Based on the NDVI, NDMI and RVI, three images in each period are processed and output to explore the long-term impact of exploitation. The results show that from 1995 to 2020, the proportion of vegetation around mining areas decreased sharply, the scale of construction land in the mining area increased, and the vegetated land was changed to land types such as tailings ponds, oil sand mines and other land types. In addition, three vegetation indexes decreased from 1995 to 2020. Although the exploitation of oil sand mining areas brings great economic benefits, the environmental protection (especially vegetation) in oil sand mining areas should be paid more attention.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental & Earth SciencesSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207