Characterizing Production–Living–Ecological Space Evolution and Its Driving Factors: A Case Study of the Chaohu Lake Basin in China from 2000 to 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The division of the territorial space functional area is the primary method to study the rational exploitation and use of land space. The research on the Production–Living–Ecological Space (PLES) change and its motivating factors has major implications for managing and optimizing spatial planning and may open up a new research direction for inquiries into environmental change on a global scale. In this study, the transfer matrix and landscape pattern index methods were used to analyze the temporal changes as well as the evolution features of the landscape pattern of the PLES in the Chaohu Lake Basin from 2000 to 2020. Using principal component analysis and grey correlation analysis, the primary driving indicators of the spatial changes of the PLES in the Chaohu Lake Basin and the degree of the influence of various driving factors on various spatial types were determined. The study concluded with a few findings. First, from the standpoint of landscape structure, the Chaohu Lake Basin’s agricultural production space (APS) makes up more than 60% of the total area, and it and urban living space (ULS) are the two most visible spatial categories. Second, the pattern of the landscape demonstrates that the area used for agricultural production holds a significant advantage within the overall structure of the landscape. Although there is less connectedness between different landscape types, less landscape dominance, and more landscape fragmentation, the structure of different landscape types tends to be more varied. Third, the findings of the driving analysis demonstrate that the natural climate, population structure of agricultural development, and industrial structure of economic development are the three driving indicators of the change of the PLES. Finally, in order to promote the formation of a territorial space development pattern with intensive and efficient production space, appropriate living space, and beautiful ecological space, it is proposed to carry out land regulation according to natural factors, economic development, national policies, and other actual conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".