MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1534111581 · doi:10.1002/9780470057339.vnn147

Natural Disturbance Processes

2012· other· en· W1534111581 on OpenAlexaff
Craig DeLong, Philip J. Burton, Marten Geertsema

Bibliographic record

VenueEncyclopedia of Environmetrics · 2012
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisturbance (geology)Natural (archaeology)EcologyVegetation (pathology)EcosystemEnvironmental scienceHabitatEcological successionLandslidePlant communityGeographyBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Natural disturbance processes have a major influence on landscape and stand‐level patterns of vegetation age, size of vegetation patches, and horizontal and vertical structures of vegetation communities. A selective reorganization of the ecological community occurs after disturbances, resulting from a pulse of resources to which the new community responds. Through these influences, natural disturbance affects habitat availability and processes such as site productivity, hydrology, and animal movement. Natural disturbance processes as diverse as fire, biotic agents (such as grazing mammals, forest insects or fungal pathogens), volcanic eruptions, landslides, and flooding all affect an ecosystem in different ways and lead to unique vegetation patterns. Attempting to approximate natural disturbance processes with human‐caused disturbance is possible at some levels but remains fundamentally different, necessitating the retention of natural areas where natural disturbance can continue to play its important role in maintaining healthy ecosystems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEncyclopedia of EnvironmetricsSame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207