MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7061968807

The Relationship between Ecosystem Services, Human Health and Well-being and its Implication for Environmental Planning: An Agent-Based Model and Geosimulation

2021· other· en· W7061968807 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSuperconducting Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHazardEcosystem healthHuman healthEcosystem servicesEcosystemWatershedAction planVegetation (pathology)Normalized Difference Vegetation Index
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A tremendous number of studies have examined the relationship between ecosystem health and human health and well-being, especially in urban settings. The project builds upon a nation-wide Canadian study by Crouse et al. (2017) which explored the correlations between urban greenness and cause-specific mortalities using Cox proportional hazard ratios. Crouse et al. (2017) concluded that increased urban greenness in proximity to participants’ residences is associated with decreases in the risks of cause-specific mortalities. The goal of this project is to develop an agent-based model using NetLogo to explore the relationship between ecosystem services, human health and well-being in the Credit River Watershed (CRW). The model utilizes a Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) to establish values of urban greenness in the CRW. Then, hazard ratios are calculated from these NDVI values based on the association observed in the Crouse et al. (2017) study. The model uses a tree-planting, or greening, agent that changes the values of greenness in the study area, thus decreasing hazard ratios. The greening agent is counteracted by a developer agent which converts land adjacent to residential \nareas into new development. Consequently, this action decreases greenness and increases hazard ratios. This interaction occurs overtime and the results are shown through geosimulation. The model also provides a set of user-defined parameters that modify the nature of agent interactions and the underlying rules governing the model. Overall, the model serves as an educational and decision-support tool for stakeholders in the CRW, including residents, municipal planners, conservation authorities, and policy makers.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)Same topicSuperconducting Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207