MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399771666 · doi:10.32920/26053099

Exploring Urbanization-induced Wetland Loss Within the Greater Toronto Area From 2005 to 2015

2024· preprint· en· W4399771666 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kaushika Vinotheeswaran

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrbanizationWetlandGeographyEnvironmental planningEconomic geographyEnvironmental scienceNatural resource economicsEnvironmental resource managementBusinessEconomic growthEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Greater Toronto Area (GTA) located in Ontario, Canada, is one of the fastest-growing metropolitan areas in North America. Rapid urbanization within the GTA leads to increased imperviousness and surface runoff, resulting in wetland loss. Wetland cover and land cover data from the Southern Ontario Land Resource Information System was analyzed to characterize wetland loss to built-up areas and land conversions between 2005 and 2015 to evaluate the extent of urbanization-induced wetland loss. Spatial analysis determined a significant increase in the number of wetlands lost from 2005-2011 compared to 2011-2015; losses that were attributed to increased urban expansions within the GTA. Non-wetland conversions such as agricultural and impervious built-up uses to support urban expansions had a significant role in wetland loss. Wetland conservation policies must be re-evaluated to alleviate gaps in policy practice to focus on minimizing wetland loss.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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