MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405258842 · doi:10.5267/j.dsl.2024.10.004

Relationship between the average annual temperature and the area of Amazonian humid forest in the departments of Peru, 2013-2021

2024· article· en· W4405258842 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maria De Los Angeles Guzman Cuba, E.M. Rojas, Dante Manuel García Jimenez

Bibliographic record

VenueDecision Science Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Cultural Studies in Latin America and Beyond
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmazonianHectareForest coverGeographyAmazon rainforestEnvironmental scienceForestryRainforestMean radiant temperatureClimate changePhysical geographyEcologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study analyzed the relationship between the average annual temperature and the area of Amazonian forest in the departments of Peru during the period 2013-2021, using a panel data model with random effects. The data used come from the National Institute of Statistics and Informatics (INEI) and include the average annual temperature in degrees Celsius and the area of Amazonian rainforest in thousands of hectares, both disaggregated by department. Additionally, CO2 emissions resulting from the loss of tree cover, measured in megatons (Mt) of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e), were considered as a control variable. The results revealed a positive and statistically significant relationship between the area of Amazonian forest and the average annual temperature, denoting that an increase of one thousand hectares in the extension of the forest corresponds to an increase of 0.0004 °C in temperature. In this sense, the finding contradicts the climate-regulating role played by forests, however, this is attributed to the influence of unobserved confounding variables that are linked to both forest area and temperature.

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)0.002
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDecision Science LettersSame topicEnvironmental and Cultural Studies in Latin America and BeyondFrench-language works237,207