MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395955594 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.190408

Assessing the Impacts of Fish In-Cage Farming and Tourism on Lake Toba’s Water Quality

2024· article· en· W4395955594 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Manuntun Parulian Hutagaol, Dahri Tanjung, Kukuh Nirmala, Yuni Puji Hastuti, Yulia Puspadewi Wulandari

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Biodiversity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCageWater qualityFisheryEnvironmental scienceTourismAgricultureFish <Actinopterygii>Fish farmingWater resource managementHydrology (agriculture)AquacultureGeographyGeologyEcologyBiologyEngineeringGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In response to the claim of bad water quality of Lake Toba for an international tourism destination, the government of North Sumatra issued two regulations that determined the improvement of water quality from mesotrophic to oligotrophic and scaling down of carrying capacity from 70 thousand to 10 thousand tons per annum.This regulation provoked conflict between the tourism industry and the fish in-cage farming industry.This study was carried out to verify as to whether the fish in-cage farming industry is the sole major factor in the deterioration of Lake Toba's water quality.Field research was carried out in 2020-2021 at 60 sampling points around Lake Toba.Identified water quality based on nutrients consisting of total nitrogen, total phosphorus, chlorophyll, and water brightness.The study concluded that fish in-cage farming was not the single major factor responsible for the lake's water deterioration.It also concluded the appropriate ceiling production capacity was 67 thousand tons per annum, and the water quality became mesotrophic.Therefore, it recommended the provincial government should change its management approach to controlling pollution entering Lake Toba from an instructive (top-down) to a multi-stakeholder approach called the co-management model.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicAquatic Ecosystems and BiodiversityFrench-language works237,207