{"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002731482,0.0007021825,0.0004024564,0.001367874,0.001337283,0.001973668,0.001639624,0.0009353764,0.001815002],"category_scores_gemma":[0.005410527,0.000348645,0.0005627418,0.00166112,0.00115513,0.0008383288,0.000861957,0.0008307074,0.00006143516],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.02837972,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01225209,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.7675715,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8630286,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9984475,0.000601596,0.00003361954,0.00008928506,0.0004229025,0.0004051953],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9961154,0.002521575,0.0002723538,0.0001526451,0.0005875615,0.0003503705],"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":[0.0008968567,0.0005312458,0.09443119,0.0001752127,0.0001878088,0.001214556,0.0003157786,0.8448592,0.001630363,0.0221368,0.001434332,0.03218662],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003558101,0.001544957,0.1323344,0.0001051154,0.0003760979,0.0003414113,0.003036672,0.8430489,0.002615751,0.007093758,0.009000614,0.0001465278],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.978483,0.0003639487,0.002939753,0.0003185711,0.000008514995,0.000175377,0.0004379509,0.00004088975,0.0172321],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9952443,0.0002120215,0.002757485,0.00002758832,0.00000426459,0.00002781451,0.0001661925,0.000004184611,0.00155616],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.2324285,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4675946,"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."}}