MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387779032 · doi:10.5539/jgg.v15n2p33

Application of GIS in Land Policy and Planning Strategies in Rural Revitalization

2023· article· en· W4387779032 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tao Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geography and Geology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Environment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaEnvironmental planningGeographic information systemBusinessSustainable developmentLand-use planningRural areaLand useEnvironmental resource managementEconomic growthRegional scienceGeographyPolitical scienceEconomicsEngineeringCivil engineeringRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, there has been a growing emphasis on reviving rural areas in China, which has become a crucial strategic direction for the nation's economic and social development. Currently, rural revitalization is a major endeavor in China, and the successful implementation of land policy and planning strategies is crucial to its achievement. This study seeks to examine the use of Geographic Information System (GIS) in crafting land policy and planning strategies for rural rejuvenation. By harnessing GIS technology, a thorough evaluation and analysis of rural land resources can be undertaken, furnishing a scientific basis for formulating land policy. Furthermore, Geographical Information Systems (GIS) provide opportunities for spatial analysis, simulation, and decision support capabilities to implement rural land policy and planning strategies. Nevertheless, the use of GIS technology presents challenges and limitations in terms of data acquisition and technological implementation. To promote the sustainable development of the rural economy, future research efforts should concentrate on further enhancing the utilization of GIS technology in rural revitalization.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geography and GeologySame topicRegional Development and EnvironmentFrench-language works237,207