MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387877090 · doi:10.47852/bonviewglce32021242

Applications of Remote Sensing as Climate Resilience Technique: A Bibliometric Research Trends Analysis

2023· article· en· W4387877090 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Arpita Ghosh

Bibliographic record

VenueGreen and Low-Carbon Economy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Heat Island Mitigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeEnvironmental scienceDesertificationEnvironmental resource managementRemote sensingGeographic information systemSustainabilityAridPrecipitationGeographyMeteorologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regional variances in climate, soil, and topography make agricultural production systems particularly fragile. Animal health is negatively impacted by variations in air temperature, precipitation, frequency, and intensity of extreme weather events. For its assessment and administration, cutting-edge methods like remote sensing (RS), global positioning systems, and geographic information systems (GIS) might be very beneficial. The RS and GIS are essential tools with numerous applications for tackling these problems. The impact of climatic and human-induced changes on the environment is receiving more attention as a result of climate change (CC). Due to CC and human activity, “desertification” describes the degradation of land in arid, semiarid, and dry sub-humid regions. Natural resource sustainability in changing climates can be obtained with the application of RS and GIS. In this review article, the issues toward wildlife were demonstrated and the application of RS was discussed to reduce the impact of CC to save the wildlife and its preservation. Further, the bibliometric analysis was conducted via R-studio Bibliometric tool, which entailed that developed countries (USA, Canada, Germany) are more forward to applying RS tool to mitigate climate risks. Received: 18 June 2023 | Revised: 25 July 2023 | Accepted: 16 September 2023 Conflicts of Interest The author declares that she has no conflicts of interest to this work. Data Availability Statement Data available on request from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Author Contribution Statement Arpita Ghosh: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Validation, Investigation, Resources, Data curation, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing, Visualization, Supervision, Project administration.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0120.061
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.279 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreen and Low-Carbon EconomySame topicUrban Heat Island MitigationFrench-language works237,207