MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402462526 · doi:10.4236/oje.2024.149039

Socio-Spatial Dynamics of Land in Southwest Niger: The Case of the Commune of Gothèye

2024· article· en· W4402462526 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Maimouna Ali, Salamatou Abdourahamane, Abdourhimou Amadou Issoufou, Idrissa Soumana, Ali Mahamane

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Ecology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Rural Development Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsGeographyDynamics (music)AgroforestryEnvironmental sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In south-west Niger, ecosystems are losing several hectares of their surface area every year due to internally displaced persons and refugees. The commune of Gothèye is not immune to this situation. The aim of this research is to assess the impact of displaced persons and refugees on socio-spatio-temporal dynamics of ecosystems using Landsat images. To achieve this, Landsat TM, Landsat ETM+ and OLI 8 satellite images from September and March were used (2010 to 2024). Operations on Envi 5.3, field validation output and finally mapping on ArcGIS were the steps involved. Discrimination is significant, with kappa coefficients of 0.97, 0.96, 0.86 and 0.85. The results obtained indicate a degradation of natural ecosystems, reflected in a change in landscape structure, with a marked reduction in the quantity and quality of ecosystem goods. Analysis of the evolution of land use showed that 31% of the land remained in its initial state (unchanged), 69% underwent modifications, and 11% was converted to cropland. Over these fourteen years, the study area has undergone changes in land use patterns, which have resulted in a modification of landscape structure, with a marked decline in the quantity and quality of ecosystem services.

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 score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.901

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Journal of EcologySame topicAgriculture and Rural Development ResearchFrench-language works237,207