ArticleScientific reports2026
An integrated budget calculation model for environmental geological mapping.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As a cornerstone of national geological endeavors, environmental geological mapping requires scientifically rigorous budgeting standards to enhance resource allocation efficiency and ensure survey quality. This study establishes a multidimensional budget calculation model tailored for 1:50,000 environmental geological mapping, integrating the cost-quota theory, which links resource inputs to standardized work units, within a structured four-phase methodology comprising data collection, quota determination, model development, and empirical validation. We extracted key productivity metrics-such as work efficiency (e.g., a standardized group-day efficiency of 4.8 km²/day), personnel deployment, material consumption, equipment allocation, and transportation quotas-from 12,843 field logs provided by 16 national survey teams. The model applies fundamental engineering economics principles ("quantity-price-cost") underpinned by cost-quota theory to compute theoretical budget values, which are further refined through a dual-dimensional adjustment mechanism incorporating geological complexity (coefficients ranging from 1.0 to 1.5) and regional cost coefficients. Empirical validation shows that the proposed model reduces budget deviations to below 3% (specifically 2.1%, 1.7%, and 2.5% across three distinct geological settings), markedly surpassing traditional budgeting approaches. This study offers a scalable and scientifically grounded framework for budget management in geological surveys, with substantial practical implications for optimizing fiscal resource allocation and promoting standardization within the industry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.