{"id":"W2326726147","doi":"10.5558/tfc2012-060","title":"Review of herbicide use for forest management in Alberta, 1995–2009","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Forestry Chronicle","topic":"Forest Insect Ecology and Management","field":"Environmental Science","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Environmental resource management; Forest management; Stakeholder; Identification (biology); Environmental science; Risk management; Metric (unit); Business; Environmental planning; Agroforestry; Ecology","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":[0.001690035,0.0006526797,0.0006727679,0.008171767,0.0004436687,0.001254092,0.001149514,0.000360423,0.002515966],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00304877,0.0002936017,0.0005984643,0.01561996,0.0003806308,0.0004531777,0.0003218585,0.0004515548,0.0003316313],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01405538,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.03154393,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8143001,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9245902,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987687,0.0001255412,0.0001980438,0.00009773744,0.0007303695,0.00007961084],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9966628,0.0007924232,0.0006569942,0.00003888557,0.001701982,0.0001468562],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0003377347,0.00005451541,0.009235504,0.07754259,0.0005980704,0.000455304,0.0008560126,0.001212598,0.001691783,0.0009084229,0.0675161,0.8395914],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003979461,0.0002059368,0.1139959,0.03256765,0.001836847,0.0007091177,0.0008302112,0.0001737393,0.001143417,0.0001494775,0.8482825,0.00006536939],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.002766711,0.99085,0.00009184107,0.0004270805,0.0002204622,0.00002480046,0.001291267,0.00002066857,0.004307127],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.01796998,0.9770848,0.0004722262,0.0004089721,0.0001276941,0.00001627988,0.001731085,0.000007154024,0.002181807],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1856999,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3735871,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.01595199576990387,"score_gpt":0.2521388056571293,"score_spread":0.2361868098872255,"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."}}