MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Land use and land cover play weak roles in typhoon economic losses at the county level

2021· dataset· en· W4394358136 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2021
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Sustainable Development
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTyphoonCover (algebra)Land coverEnvironmental scienceGeographyLand useNatural resource economicsPhysical geographyEnvironmental resource managementMeteorologyEconomicsCivil engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many empirical typhoon economic loss models consider that the losses caused by typhoons mainly depend on the intensity of the hazards and the exposure in the affected areas. Few studies have attracted attention to the role of disaster-formative environmental factors in typhoon losses. In this study, we chose land use and land cover (LULC) as disaster-formative environmental factors together with typhoon wind speed, rainfall, and gross domestic product (GDP) as predictive factors for typhoon economic losses in Guangdong Province, China. The results showed that the intensity of wind speed was the most important factor, while LULC played weak roles in typhoon economic losses for 23 typical typhoons in terms of county level losses in Guangdong. Subregionally, typhoon economic loss models performed better in coastal areas than in noncoastal areas.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3320.004

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.191 · 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