MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1582072414

Principles and concepts of management.

2006· article· en· W1582072414 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
T. L. Shore, L. Safranyik, R. J. Whitehead, Bill Wilson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMountain pine beetleDendroctonusPinus contortaGeographyForest managementPopulationEcologyHost (biology)AgroforestryBark beetleEnvironmental resource managementForestryBiologyEnvironmental science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this section, an introduction to management of mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopk. [Coleoptera: Scolytidae]) and its host is provided and basic principles and concepts of management are described. Preventive management is used in Western Canada to reduce tree, stand and landscape susceptibility to the mountain pine beetle. As well, direct control strategies and tactics are used to reduce mountain pine beetle populations. The two approaches are combined and form an integral part of a management plan. Forest protection and management of forest health are vital components of land management to achieve stated objectives. Plans to manage insects, including the mountain pine beetle, are developed to support land management objectives and form an integral part of land management plans. The principles for reducing losses of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex Loud. var. latifolia Engelm.) to the mountain pine beetle must be based on the main features of beetle population dynamics, especially the evolved insect-host interaction. Key features of this interaction are the effects of tree, stand, and site parameters on tree and stand susceptibility, the process of population change from the endemic to the epidemic state, and the role of beetle population size and spatial distribution of susceptible stands in the development and maintenance of outbreaks at the landscape level. These and other aspects of the insect host interaction are described in detail elsewhere in this volume.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.010

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207