MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391810188 · doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2024.01.017

Contrasting consequences of the Great Green Wall: Easing aridity while increasing heat extremes

2024· article· en· W4391810188 on OpenAlexafffund
Roberto Ingrosso, Francesco S. R. Pausata

Bibliographic record

VenueOne Earth · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsClimate changeVegetation (pathology)ClimatologyEnvironmental sciencePrecipitationDesertificationAridLiberian dollarMonsoonGeographyPhysical geographyMeteorologyEcologyGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Great Green Wall (GGW) is a multibillion-dollar African initiative to combat desertification in the Sahel. However, the potential climate impacts of the most recent GGW plan on northern Africa have not yet been adequately evaluated, raising concerns about unforeseen climate ramifications that could affect stability in northern Africa and undermine the goals of the initiative. Using a high-resolution (∼13 km) regional climate model, we evaluate the climate impacts of four GGW scenarios with varying vegetation densities under two extreme emission pathways (low and high). Higher vegetation density GGW scenarios under both emission pathways show enhanced rainfall, reduced drought lengths, and decreased summer temperatures beyond the GGW region relative to the cases with no GGW. However, all GGW scenarios show more extreme hot days and higher heat indices in the pre-monsoonal season. These findings highlight the GGW contrasting climatic effects, emphasizing the need for comprehensive assessments in shaping future policies.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations20
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOne EarthSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207