MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410058400 · doi:10.63471/sa24005

AI-Driven Strategies for Reducing Deforestation in U.S. Agriculture

2024· article· en· W4410058400 on OpenAlexaff
Rakibul Hasan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Agricultural Economics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsWycliffe College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeforestation (computer science)AgricultureAgroforestryNatural resource economicsEnvironmental scienceGeographyEconomicsComputer scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Agricultural conversion is a major reason for deforestation that affects the United States and is responsible for the loss of species, soil depletion and global warming. This work aims to analyze the use of AI for combating deforestation in the agricultural sector in the United States through improved surveillance, risk assessments, and policy modeling. This proposed framework combines satellite imagery data, agricultural records, and selected socio-economic factors and uses CNNs, GBMs, and ABMs to tackle deforestation systematically. CNN also showed an accuracy of 94% in the identification of the area of deforestation, while the GBMs showed an accuracy of 0.92 AUC-ROC in identifying hotspot areas. Through ABMs that assumed policy changes such as reforestation incentives and fines for violators, the study showed that deforestation rates could be cut by up to 25%. Regression and correlation analyses and hypothesis testing proved significant predictors such as crop yield, rainfall variability and the superiority of the models to conventional techniques. The outcomes reveal that AI can offer an effective solution to increase food production and maintain forests at the same time. This framework allows for the formulation of specific recommendations for policy initiatives because it incorporates empirical evidence. Further research should improve the modularity, the real-time monitoring system and the access to the algorithm to further increase the impact of AI on sustainable land management and the chopping down of forests.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.555
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

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 communication0.0010.002
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueJournal of Sustainable Agricultural EconomicsSame topicAgricultural Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207