{"id":"W4237368920","doi":"10.1139/x00-081","title":"An economic assessment of using the allowable cut effect for enhanced forest management policies: an Alberta case study","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Forest Research","topic":"Forest Management and Policy","field":"Environmental Science","cited_by":11,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"U.S. Forest Service","keywords":"Incentive; Silviculture; Deciduous; Forest management; Time horizon; Business; Flexibility (engineering); Agroforestry; Natural resource economics; Environmental science; Agricultural economics; Economics; Forestry; Geography; Finance; Ecology","routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":true},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002857183,0.0001775159,0.0002676369,0.0003721426,0.0006330549,0.0001998667,0.0009988594,0.00005127435,0.002557719],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00002605171,0.0001318027,0.0001152697,0.0003316416,0.0003995185,0.0005396754,0.00006159136,0.0002610963,0.00004315312],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0007966232,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002955,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.4557533,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8815001,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9976805,0.000379688,0.0004623397,0.0002581818,0.0004215739,0.0007977166],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99833,0.00022133,0.0001440207,0.0006025295,0.00003994662,0.0006621638],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001279056,0.0002440641,0.7030355,0.00005856037,0.0001930105,0.0006922349,0.003575794,0.2791425,0.00009305927,0.001170047,0.004013041,0.007654246],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.01058856,0.02638055,0.6847228,0.0002913905,0.0006579741,0.001653427,0.01940473,0.1764523,0.0004688971,0.002914424,0.07487822,0.001586734],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9833446,0.00001147133,0.00004155114,0.0001519597,0.00008570249,0.001345355,0.00001105206,0.000002566922,0.01500577],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9970757,0.0000109666,0.0003236208,0.00004545954,0.000154489,0.00004115972,0.000004216907,0.0000297254,0.00231471],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.4257468,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9983541,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.04032975178638623,"score_gpt":0.3866464837693627,"score_spread":0.3463167319829765,"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."}}