MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7118323634 · doi:10.22761/gd.2025.0066

Spatial Assessment of the IUCN Red List Ecosystems in Limestone Areas: Focusing on Gangwon and Chungcheongbuk Provinces

2025· article· en· W7118323634 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sang-Hak Han, Sung-Ryong Kang

Bibliographic record

VenueGEO DATA · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEcology and Conservation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Ecology
KeywordsIUCN Red ListBiodiversityEcosystemCritically endangeredEndangered speciesData deficientEndemismOccupancyThreatened speciesVulnerability (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) red list of ecosystems (RLE) has been adopted as a headline indicator for the Kunming-Montreal global biodiversity framework, highlighting its global significance. Limestone areas in South Korean are biodiversity hotspots with a high proportion of rare and endemic species due to their unique environmental conditions; however, they face severe threats from continuous limestone mining. This study assessed the collapse risk of limestone vegetation ecosystems in Korea using the IUCN RLE spatial criteria (criterion B). Based on digital geological maps, we mapped the distribution of major limestone areas, focusing on Gangwon-do and Chungcheongbuk-do. We calculated the extent of occurrence (EOO; criterion B1) and area of occupancy (AOO; criterion B2). To enhance precision, the AOO assessment incorporated grid uncertainty analysis and the 1% threshold rule. The results showed that the total area of limestone regions was approximately 2,760.8 km<sup>2</sup>. The EOO was calculated as 11,030.36 km<sup>2</sup>, classifying the ecosystem as endangered (EN). Conversely, the AOO assessment resulted in 76 grids (7,600 km<sup>2</sup>) even under the most conservative scenario (considering uncertainty and the 1% rule), classifying it as least concern. Following IUCN guidelines to adopt the highest risk category, the final status of the limestone ecosystem was determined as EN. This restricted geographic distribution implies high vulnerability to external threats. These findings provide essential scientific evidence for establishing national conservation strategies and achieving the 30×30 protected area target.

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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 venueGEO DATASame topicEcology and Conservation StudiesFrench-language works237,207