{"id":"W2264462087","doi":"10.5558/tfc2011-013","title":"Benefit–cost Analysis of Vegetation Management Alternatives: An Ontario Case Study","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Forestry Chronicle","topic":"Forest Management and Policy","field":"Environmental Science","cited_by":22,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"Ontario Forest Research Institute; Lakehead University","funders":"","keywords":"Vegetation (pathology); Environmental science; Net present value; Internal rate of return; Benefit–cost ratio; Forestry; Geography; Production (economics); Economics","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001138983,0.0005865904,0.0004256403,0.0009571229,0.001071508,0.0007696434,0.0007991448,0.0004683042,0.002152258],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002477186,0.0002243379,0.0006565909,0.001698244,0.0006636335,0.0004783605,0.0003843454,0.0004060401,0.00007798428],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.02877307,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007430507,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.7570665,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8862507,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991725,0.000265606,0.00002068495,0.00004731158,0.0002721601,0.000221667],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985958,0.0007135405,0.0001401736,0.00006874488,0.0003815081,0.0001001968],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"simulation_or_modeling","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.002731013,0.001322134,0.1532827,0.0008362806,0.0004872976,0.002219133,0.0009483501,0.7182146,0.007838449,0.01535268,0.005301557,0.09146572],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001004961,0.003662311,0.3197047,0.0001443725,0.0009189867,0.0005647307,0.004465364,0.6347036,0.006177616,0.00688266,0.02157091,0.0001998468],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9880534,0.0003063873,0.001054282,0.0001587418,0.00000368065,0.00024969,0.0007679054,0.00001099895,0.009395049],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9937013,0.0003324398,0.002626031,0.00001823525,0.000003505766,0.00008759185,0.0004053374,0.00000508977,0.002820378],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.2429335,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4887282,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.03247150711931535,"score_gpt":0.2727271841151181,"score_spread":0.2402556769958027,"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."}}