MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1708939271 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2013-0385

Developing generalized, calibratable, mixed-effects meta-models for large-scale biomass prediction

2014· article· en· W1708939271 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sergio de‐Miguel, Lauri Mehtätalo, Ali Durkaya

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomass (ecology)CalibrationScale (ratio)Pinus brutiaRange (aeronautics)Generalized linear mixed modelComputer sciencePredictive modellingEnvironmental scienceSample size determinationSampling (signal processing)Mixed modelStatisticsEcologyMathematicsMachine learningPinus <genus>Geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-scale prediction of forest biomass is of interest for forest science, ecology, and issues related to climate change. Previous research has attempted to provide allometric models suitable for large-scale biomass prediction using different methods. We present a new approach for meta-analysis of existing biomass equations using mixed-effects modelling on simulated data. The resulting generalized meta-models can be calibrated for local conditions. This meta-analytical approach allows for directly benefiting from previous research to minimize data collection and properly take into account the unknown differences between different locations within large areas. The approach is demonstrated by developing pan-Mediterranean mixed-effects meta-models for Pinus brutia Ten. The fixed part of the meta-models enables sound aboveground biomass predictions throughout practically the full native range of the species. Significant improvement in the predictive performance can be further gained by using small local datasets for model calibration. The calibration procedure for location-specific biomass prediction is based on best linear unbiased predictor of random effects. The predictive performance of the meta-models under different sampling strategies is validated in an independent dataset. The results show that mixed-effects meta-models may enable accurate and robust large-scale biomass predictions. Calibration for specific locations based on minimal data collection effort performs better than fitting location-specific equations based on much larger samples. The advantages of mixed-effects meta-models are of interest not only for further biomass-related research and applications, but also for other modelling disciplines within forest science.

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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.016
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations30
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicForest ecology and management→French-language works237,207→