MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1576139011 · doi:10.1002/env.2304

Statistical modeling and forecasting of fruit crop phenology under climate change

2014· article· en· W1576139011 on OpenAlexafffund
S. Cai, James V. Zidek, Nathaniel K. Newlands, D. Neilsen

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmetrics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaCarleton University
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaGovernment of CanadaAustralian Government
KeywordsPhenologyClimate changeBloomEnvironmental scienceGrowing degree-dayClimatologyGlobal warmingClimate modelEconometricsEcologyMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phenology, the study of the association between biological development stages and variations in climate, has greatly increased in importance because of concerns arising from climate change. This paper presents a general stochastic approach to the modeling of the relationship between phenological events and climate variables, and gives a prediction method based on this approach to provide full predictive distributions for future events. The proposed methods are then applied to the modeling and prediction of the bloom dates of six high‐valued fruit crops. In particular, we use our approach to explore how the bloom dates are related to the accumulation of growing degree days, to provide a sensible estimate of an important parameter Tbase in phenological study, and to assess the prediction of bloom dates with a leave‐one‐out procedure. Most importantly, the impact of future climate change on bloom dates is studied with temperature outputs from well‐established coupled global climate models under a high greenhouse gases scenario. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmetricsSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207