MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4394479818 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14511630

Human-climate coupled changes in vegetation community complexity of China since the 1980s

2022· dataset· en· W4394479818 on OpenAlexaff
Yanjun Su, Qinghua Guo, Hongcan Guan, J. F. Hu, Shichao Jin, Zhiheng Wang, Lingli Liu, Lin Jiang, Ke Guo, Zongqiang Xie, An Shazhou, Xuelin Chen, Zhanqing Hao, Yuanman Hu, Yongmei Huang, Mingxi Jiang, Jiaxiang Li, Zhenji Li, Xiankun Li, Xiaowei Li, Cunzhu Liang, Liu Renlin, Qing Liu, Hongwei Ni, Shaolin Peng, Zehao Shen, Zhiyao Tang, Xingjun Tian, Xihua Wang, Renqing Wang, Yingzhong Xie, Xiaoniu Xu, Xiaobo Yang, Yongchuan Yang, Lifei Yu, Ming Yue, Feng Zhang, Jun Chen, Keping Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaVegetation (pathology)GeographyEnvironmental scienceClimate changePhysical geographyClimatologyEcologyGeologyBiologyArchaeologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vegetation community complexity is a critical factor influencing terrestrial ecosystem stability. China, the country leading the world in vegetation greening resulting from human activities, has experienced dramatic changes in vegetation community composition during the past 30 years. However, how China’s vegetation community complexity varies spatially and temporally remains unclear. Here, we provided the datasets and codes used to investigate this issue, as published in "Human-climate coupled changes in vegetation community complexity of China since 1980s" by Su et al.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicLand Use and Ecosystem Services→French-language works237,207→