MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404006998 · doi:10.1029/2023rg000817

Global Land Subsidence: Impact of Climate Extremes and Human Activities

2024· article· en· W4404006998 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

VenueReviews of Geophysics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUnited Nations University Institute for Water, Environment, and Health
FundersOffice of International Science and EngineeringCalifornia Institute for Water Resources, University of CaliforniaConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Department of EnergyDivision of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport SystemsNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationDivision of Civil, Mechanical and Manufacturing InnovationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSubsidenceClimate changeGeologyEnvironmental sciencePhysical geographyClimatologyGeographyOceanographyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Globally, land subsidence (LS) often adversely impacts infrastructure, humans, and the environment. As climate change intensifies the terrestrial hydrologic cycle and severity of climate extremes, the interplay among extremes (e.g., floods, droughts, wildfires, etc.), LS, and their effects must be better understood since LS can alter the impacts of extreme events, and extreme events can drive LS. Furthermore, several processes causing subsidence (e.g., ice‐rich permafrost degradation, oxidation of organic matter) have been shown to also release greenhouse gases, accelerating climate change. Our review aims to synthesize these complex relationships, including human activities contributing to LS, and to identify the causes and rates of subsidence across diverse landscapes. We primarily focus on the era of synthetic aperture radar (SAR), which has significantly contributed to advancements in our understanding of ground deformations around the world. Ultimately, we identify gaps and opportunities to aid LS monitoring, mitigation, and adaptation strategies and guide interdisciplinary efforts to further our process‐based understanding of subsidence and associated climate feedbacks. We highlight the need to incorporate the interplay of extreme events, LS, and human activities into models, risk and vulnerability assessments, and management practices to develop improved mitigation and adaptation strategies as the global climate warms. Without consideration of such interplay and/or feedback loops, we may underestimate the enhancement of climate change and acceleration of LS across many regions, leaving communities unprepared for their ramifications. Proactive and interdisciplinary efforts should be leveraged to develop strategies and policies that mitigate or reverse anthropogenic LS and climate change impacts.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.270 · 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