MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416297481 · doi:10.5194/ica-proc-7-19-2025

Land use change analysis of the flooded area in the Guaiba Hydrographic Region in southern Brazil 2024

2025· article· en· W4416297481 on OpenAlex
Leandro Meneguelli Biondo, George P. Ferreira, Bernardo M. Trovão, Jon Corbett

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ICA · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and biological studies
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do SulMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação
KeywordsLand useFlood mythHydrographyVegetation (pathology)Land use, land-use change and forestryClimate changeLand coverWetland

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The impact of extreme weather events is largely influenced by land cover, as demonstrated by the catastrophic flood in Rio Grande do Sul (RS), Brazil, in May 2024. Over 200mm of rain fell daily in numerous municipalities, displacing 2.3 million people. Although forests cannot entirely mitigate such extreme rainfall, they can help reduce runoff and related damages. We conducted a geospatial analysis to assess land use changes from 1985 to 2022 in the Guaíba Hydrographic Region, applying a three-step raster analysis using GIS tools. We classified pixels as natural or anthropogenic to monitor vegetation changes over four periods. Data processing efficiency improved significantly with a PostgreSQL approach, reducing query time from 20 hours to five minutes after a lenghthy initial pre-processing. Our findings indicated a higher long-term anthropogenic influence in flooded areas, with vegetation loss in Pampa Grasslands (PP) at 33.2%, compared to 18.1% for the Atlantic Forest (AF) and 16.8% in flooded areas. Between 1985 and 2022, we observed a fluctuating conversion rate of natural forests, with an overall loss in grasslands at an increasing annual rate. Soybean cover rose dramatically during these years, growing 430% until 2022, diminishing natural pastures in the Pampa biome. Our analysis emphasizes the effectiveness of forest protection policies while revealing that grassland areas remain poorly managed despite their crucial role in mitigating flood 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.194 · 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