MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7093093253 · doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.114295

Spatiotemporal coupling mechanism between land use and water disaster risk in lake-dominated basins: a multimodel assessment of the Dongting Lake Basin

2025· article· en· W7093093253 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Indicators · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorthwest A and F UniversityMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsLand useArable landFlood mythPopulationLand coverSpatial variabilityWater resourcesHydrology (agriculture)Vegetation (pathology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing frequency of extreme hydrological events has underscored the significant challenges involved in systematically assessing and managing compound water disasters for sustainable development. This study examined the Dongting Lake Basin, presenting an integrated risk assessment framework that incorporates drought and flood disasters across four dimensions and 13 indicators. Employing the entropy weight method and obstacle degree model, key risk factors were identified and spatial coupling mechanisms between land use and disaster risks were quantitatively deciphered using the spatial Durbin model. From 2000 to 2020, considerable spatiotemporal variation in water disaster risks was observed, with high-risk zones consistently concentrated in eastern and central-southern regions and extending into central-northern areas during extreme years. Additionally, five principal driving factors were recognised through obstacle degree diagnostics: population density, GDP per unit area of primary and secondary industries, extreme precipitation index (flood-oriented), terrain drought sensitivity, and vegetation cover (NDVI). Land use exhibited a threshold effect, with forest land exceeding 70 % in low-risk areas (decreasing as risk level increased), while construction land accounted for more than 50 % in high-risk areas. Spatial econometric analysis demonstrated that each additional square kilometre of forest land or water bodies reduced local risk by 2.73 × 10 −4 and 9.93 × 10 −4 , respectively, whereas increases in grassland and arable land increased risk by 3.84 × 10 −4 and 2.14 × 10 −3 , respectively. Collectively, these results indicate that the spatial distribution of water-related disaster risk within the basin is shaped by population density, industrial distribution, land use structure, and natural conditions. It is recommended that land use optimisation and ecological restoration be prioritised in high-risk zones, specifically by expanding woodland and water body coverage while restricting high-vulnerability land uses. Additionally, improving disaster prevention infrastructure and enhancing response capability to extreme weather should be pursued, particularly in densely populated and economically significant areas. This study ultimately provides a dynamic spatiotemporal framework for optimising land use within lake basins, emphasising targeted exposure regulation and strengthening landscape resilience.

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)0.001
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.632

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 venueEcological IndicatorsSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207