MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307266203 · doi:10.3390/f13111751

Temporal and Spatial Characteristics of Soundscape Ecology in Urban Forest Areas and Its Landscape Spatial Influencing Factors

2022· article· en· W4307266203 on OpenAlexaff
Yujie Zhao, Shaowei Xu, Ziluo Huang, Wenqiang Fang, Shanjun Huang, Peilin Huang, Dulai Zheng, Jiaying Dong, Ziru Chen, Chen Yan, Yukun Zhong, Weicong Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueForests · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoundscapeRecreationSound (geography)Natural soundsGeographyUrban parkVegetation (pathology)Environmental scienceEcologyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explored the spatial and temporal characteristics of the urban forest area soundscape by setting up monitoring points (70 × 70 m grid) covering the study area, recorded a total of 52 sound sources, and the results showed that: (1) The soundscape composition of the park is dominated by natural sounds and recreational sounds. (2) The diurnal variation of sound sources is opposite to that of temperature, 6:00–9:00 is the best time for the public to perceive birdsong, and after 18:00, the park is dominated by insect chirps. (3) The PSD (power spectral density) and the SDI (soundscape diversity index) of the park are greatly affected by public recreation behaviors, and some recreation behaviors may affect the vocal behavior of organisms such as birds. (4) Spaces with high canopy density can attract more birdsong and recreational sounds in summer, and the combination of “tree + lake” can attract more birdsong. Vegetation has a significant dampening effect on traffic sound. (5) Landscape spatial elements, such as the proportion of hard ground, sky, trees, and shrubs, have a significant impact on changes in the PSD, the SDI and different kinds of sound sources. The research results provide effective data support for improving the soundscape of urban forests.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForestsSame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207