MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385421395 · doi:10.3390/ijgi12080306

Modelling Global Deforestation Using Spherical Geographic Automata Approach

2023· article· en· W4385421395 on OpenAlexafffund
Bright Addae, Suzana Dragićević

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSimon Fraser University
KeywordsDeforestation (computer science)DesertificationLand use, land-use change and forestryLand coverClimate changeEnvironmental resource managementLand useEnvironmental scienceUrbanizationGlobal warmingNatural resource economicsGeographyAgroforestryComputer scienceEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deforestation as a land-cover change process is linked to several environmental problems including desertification, biodiversity loss, and ultimately climate change. Understanding the land-cover change process and its relation to human–environment interactions is important for supporting spatial decisions and policy making at the global level. However, current geosimulation model applications mainly focus on characterizing urbanization and agriculture expansion. Existing modelling approaches are also unsuitable for simulating land-cover change processes covering large spatial extents. Thus, the objective of this research is to develop and implement a spherical geographic automata model to simulate deforestation at the global level under different scenarios designed to represent diverse future conditions. Simulation results from the deforestation model indicate the global forest size would decrease by 10.5% under the “business-as-usual” scenario through 2100. The global forest extent would also decline by 15.3% under the accelerated deforestation scenario and 3.7% under the sustainable deforestation scenario by the end of the 21st century. The obtained simulation outputs also revealed the rate of deforestation in protected areas to be considerably lower than the overall forest-cover change rate under all scenarios. The proposed model can be utilized by stakeholders to examine forest conservation programs and support sustainable policy making and implementation.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score0.443

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 communication0.0000.004
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.249
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 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS International Journal of Geo-InformationSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207