MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410527129 · doi:10.18280/ijdne.200415

Post-Tsunami Vegetation Structure and Diversity of Coastal Forests on Sebesi Island, Lampung, Indonesia

2025· article· en· W4410527129 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Surnayanti, Machya Kartika Tsani, Sugeng P. Harianto, Refi Arioen, Erlina Rufaidah

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Growth and Agriculture Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyVegetation (pathology)Diversity (politics)ForestryEcologySociologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sebesi Island is 19.1 km from the Anak Krakatau Volcano, which caused a tsunami in 2018, and is situated in Lampung Bay of the Sunda Strait.Coastal forests are essential for protecting the island from the impacts of erosion and tsunamis.This study analyzed the structure and diversity of coastal forest vegetation on Sebesi Island following the 2018 tsunami, using density analysis, the Important Value Index (IVI), dominance levels, and assessments of vertical and horizontal stand structures.Twelve plant species were recorded.Hibiscus tiliaceus predominated in the tree phase (33.33%),Rhizophora sp.achieved 100% density and an IVI of 300 in the pole phase, and Cyperus rotundus exhibited the highest seedling density (66.67%).Three vertical strata of vegetation were found, with stratum C (4-20 m high) exhibiting the greatest species variety.These results demonstrate the dominance of native species, particularly mangroves, and their structural complexity in the regeneration process.The study promotes the use of native vegetation in coastal ecosystem management and provides crucial baseline data for post-tsunami restoration.Future conservation and catastrophe mitigation measures should focus on mangroves in particular because of their high ecological resilience and role as natural buffers.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.501
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and EcodynamicsSame topicPlant Growth and Agriculture TechniquesFrench-language works237,207