{"id":"W2091243679","doi":"10.1139/x05-207","title":"Field efficiency and bias of snag inventory methods","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Forest Research","topic":"Forest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies","field":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","cited_by":30,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Snag; Sampling (signal processing); Forest inventory; Tree (set theory); Forestry; Environmental science; Mathematics; Statistics; Ecology; Geography; Computer science; Forest management; Biology","routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":true},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.07149348,0.0009581101,0.0009959409,0.001839892,0.001072526,0.001312996,0.002339134,0.000772374,0.002772844],"category_scores_gemma":[0.1026898,0.0006209429,0.0004791076,0.001829608,0.00138631,0.001323305,0.001619567,0.000605241,0.001441904],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001857236,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001082255,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01025284,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02150594,"domain_scores_codex":[0.912971,0.05422845,0.005833233,0.009694585,0.01608871,0.001184138],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.7864448,0.1325269,0.0157849,0.03085961,0.0331721,0.001211633],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0035561,0.001127663,0.5093344,0.001250275,0.0005706447,0.0003022016,0.0038766,0.01188091,0.03607037,0.003876048,0.01306546,0.4150893],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005776564,0.003382079,0.8257094,0.0007845606,0.000556552,0.001301577,0.001917198,0.0503058,0.05083883,0.007263165,0.05709271,0.0002705922],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.594461,0.002657085,0.3695862,0.001094271,0.001113537,0.005251952,0.002793828,0.001912562,0.02112957],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7066896,0.0006365145,0.2732432,0.001564764,0.0002588731,0.005007286,0.001635086,0.0006211512,0.01034353],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.07149348,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3780982,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.1378094273033477,"score_gpt":0.3470118201585831,"score_spread":0.2092023928552353,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}