{"id":"W2620357847","doi":"10.1111/1365-2664.12945","title":"Impacts of salvage logging on biodiversity: A meta‐analysis","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Applied Ecology","topic":"Forest Management and Policy","field":"Environmental Science","cited_by":385,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"Natural Resources Canada; Canadian Forest Service; Université Laval; Royal Alberta Museum; University of Northern British Columbia","funders":"Austrian Science Fund","keywords":"Logging; Biodiversity; Salvage logging; Environmental science; Agroforestry; Geography; Ecology; Environmental resource management; Forestry; Ecosystem; Biology; Forest ecology","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0004125413,0.0000802158,0.0004187124,0.0001834732,0.0001470352,0.00002197626,0.000442221,0.00004963853,0.004730826],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00002026167,0.00006108942,0.0003258646,0.00009115278,0.0001771961,0.0001090414,0.0002028103,0.0001071588,0.0004543158],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005028755,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000006283797,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0001792692,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0002894966,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9993514,0.00001648767,0.0002101987,0.00009245216,0.0001603331,0.0001691168],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989247,0.00005001357,0.0007008975,0.0002469592,0.00000558944,0.00007178814],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0008033258,0.0006440579,0.777034,0.0000493552,0.09422777,0.0002238876,0.00150987,0.02791534,0.004403101,0.004594424,0.08658449,0.002010342],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001041419,0.0004982671,0.9384832,0.00000157267,0.04450024,0.0000062034,0.00006133453,0.000178292,0.001510382,0.001948831,0.01156677,0.0002034893],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9400805,0.000009208289,0.00001364557,0.001096457,0.00006803306,0.00005991668,0.000003368145,0.000003101036,0.05866581],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9989785,0.00002514549,0.0003198171,0.0004800202,0.00002682335,5.961806e-7,5.52401e-7,0.00000242778,0.000166126],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1614491,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.996179,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.02659221893901622,"score_gpt":0.2641752097883129,"score_spread":0.2375829908492967,"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."}}