Within-tree patterns of wood stiffness for white spruce (<i>Picea glauca</i>) and trembling aspen (<i>Populus tremuloides</i>)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radial patterns of modulus of elasticity (MOE) were examined for white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) and trembling aspen (Populus tremuoides Michx.) from 19 mature, uneven-aged stands in the boreal mixedwood region of northern Alberta, Canada. The main objectives were to (1) evaluate the relationship between pith-to-bark changes in MOE and cambial age or distance from pith; (2) develop species-specific models to predict pith-to-bark changes in MOE; and (3) to test the influences of radial growth, relative vertical height, and tree slenderness (tree height/DBH) on MOE. For both species, cambial age was selected as the best explanatory variable with which to build pith-to-bark models of MOE. For white spruce and trembling aspen, the final nonlinear mixed-effect models indicated that an augmented rate of increase in MOE occurred with increasing vertical position within the tree. For white spruce trees, radial growth and slenderness were found to positively influence maximum estimated MOE. For trembling aspen, there was no apparent effect of vertical position or radial growth on maximum MOE. The results shed light on potential drivers of radial patterns of MOE and will be useful in guiding silvicultural prescriptions.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it