MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414164598 · doi:10.18280/ijdne.200706

RUSLE-Based Erosion Analysis and Its Contribution to Flooding in Kota Belud, Sabah

2025· article· en· W4414164598 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amirah Saidin, Kamilia Sharir, Dwa Desa Warnana, Wien Lestari, Rodeano Roslee

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geophysical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Malaysia Sabah
KeywordsFlooding (psychology)ErosionHydrology (agriculture)Flood mythInternal erosion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Erosion and flooding are closely linked processes that influence each other through sediment transport and hydrological changes.Erosion reduces the capacity of river channels by depositing sediment, while flooding accelerates soil detachment and transport.In Kota Belud, Sabah, this interplay is intensified by deforestation, agricultural activities, and unsustainable land development.This study employs the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) within a GIS environment to assess erosionprone areas and their contribution to flooding.A 5 m × 5 m resolution Digital Elevation Model (DEM) was used to derive the LS factor, while rainfall data, soil series, and land cover were used to compute the R, K, and C factors, respectively.The model was validated using flood-prone area data through an Area Under the Curve (AUC) analysis, resulting in an accuracy of 81.22%, indicating good predictive capability.The erosion susceptibility map revealed that 83.6% of the area has very low susceptibility, while 0.5% falls under high to very high categories.These critical zones likely contribute to sedimentation in rivers, exacerbating downstream flooding.The findings provide essential insights for regional flood management, emphasizing the need for targeted soil conservation and sustainable land-use planning in Kota Belud.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and EcodynamicsSame topicGeological and Geophysical StudiesFrench-language works237,207