MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1583823415 · doi:10.1079/9781845931742.0314

Potential contributions of statistics and modelling to sustainable forest management: review and synthesis.

2007· book-chapter· en· W1583823415 on OpenAlexaff
Keith Rennolls, Margarida Tomé, Ronald E. McRoberts, Jerome K. Vanclay, Valerie LeMay, Biing T. Guan, George Z. Gertner

Bibliographic record

VenueCABI eBooks · 2007
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilitySustainable forest managementTemporal scalesEnvironmental resource managementSpatial analysisSustainable developmentForest managementComputer scienceGeographyData scienceEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingEcologyForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter provides a review of the statistical and modelling disciplines, their techniques and potential contribution to sustainable forest management (SFM). The main topics covered are: Mensuration and models for sustainable forest management (SFM) Inventory and monitoring for forest sustainability: criteria and indicators Models of tropical forests for the conservation of biodiversity Integrating information and models across spatial and temporal scales for SFM Climate and carbon models in relation to sustainability New techniques for the statistical analysis of sustainability data Uncertainly analysis in modeling and monitoring for SFM Forest data, information and model archives There are major contributions to be made, in particular in the areas of information and model integration where a synthesis of information and models across both spatial and temporal scales is required. There is a great need for international collaboration on the development of open and shared forest data and model repositories/archives, as well as continued development of forest information systems.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.005

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations13
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCABI eBooksSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207