MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393089401 · doi:10.5267/j.dsl.2024.2.003

Analysis of rural peat environmental risk using PROMETHEE method in Riau province, Indonesia

2024· article· en· W4393089401 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ardika Perdana Fahly, Akhmad Fauzi, Bambang Juanda, Ernan Rustiadi

Bibliographic record

VenueDecision Science Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geophysical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeatGeographyEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Future global economic stability is under significant threat from environmental risks. Rural peat areas are particularly susceptible due to their elevated levels of hazard, vulnerability, and limited capacity. Acknowledging these risks is pivotal for fostering a low-carbon development trajectory. This study analyzes the environmental risk in rural peat areas within Riau Province. The PROMETHEE method, incorporating Shannon Entropy weighting for data analysis, was employed. The findings reveal that four regencies are exhibiting favorable environmental risk conditions and five regencies facing adverse conditions. The criteria influencing the environmental risk of rural peat in Riau Province showcase various positive and negative contributions across each regency. The sensitivity analysis underscores the resilience of forest fires and the social forest program in three regencies. Recognizing environmental risk can serve as a foundation for decision-makers to formulate sustainable development 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)0.002
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDecision Science LettersSame topicGeological and Geophysical StudiesFrench-language works237,207