MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378072420 · doi:10.3390/su15118489

Finding the Green Grass in the Haystack? Integrated National Assessment of Ecosystem Services and Condition in Hungary, in Support of Conservation and Planning

2023· article· en· W4378072420 on OpenAlexaff
Eszter Tanács, Ágnes Vári, Ákos Bede‐Fazekas, Andràs Báldí, Edina Csákvári, Anett Endrédi, Veronika Fabók, Lívia Kisné Fodor, Márton Kiss, P. Koncz, Anikó Kovács‐Hostyánszki, János Mészáros, László Pásztor, Rita Rezneki, Tibor Standovár, Zita Zsembery, Katalin Török

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilHungarian Scientific Research Fund
KeywordsEcosystem servicesEnvironmental resource managementEcosystemTotal human ecosystemScale (ratio)Ecosystem managementForest ecologyLand useEcosystem healthGeographyBusinessEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceEcologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human well-being needs healthy ecosystems, providing multiple ecosystem services. Therefore, the assessment of ecosystems on large scales is a priority action. In Hungary, this work (MAES-HU) took place between 2016 and 2022. Twelve ecosystem services (ES) were mapped and assessed along with several ecosystem condition (EC) indicators. Their integrated spatial analysis aimed to identify patterns of ES multifunctionality, reveal relationships between EC and ES and delineate ES bundles. The results show outstanding multifunctionality of natural ecosystem types compared with the more artificial types, emphasizing the importance of natural areas in order to fulfil human needs. Native forests provide the most varied range of services, which underlines the importance of forest management to consider multiple services. There is a positive correlation between condition and multifunctionality in forests; areas in better condition (in terms of species composition and structure) provide more services at an outstanding level. ES bundles mainly reflect the major ecosystem types, topography and forest condition. Our analysis represents an example of synthesizing national MAES results with a combination of methods. Finding ES hotspots on a national scale and connecting them with an assessment of EC may help in finding optimal strategies to balance conservation targets and competing land uses.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207