Integrating biophysical controls in forest growth and yield predictions with artificial intelligence technology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Growth and yield models are critically important for forest management planning. Biophysical factors such as light, temperature, soil water, and nutrient conditions are known to have major impacts on tree growth. However, it is difficult to incorporate these biophysical variables into growth and yield models due to large variation and complex nonlinear relationships between variables. In this study, artificial intelligence technology was used to develop individual-tree-based basal area (BA) and volume increment models. The models successfully account for the effects of incident solar radiation, growing degree days, and indices of soil water and nutrient availability on BA and volume increments of over 40 species at 5-year intervals. The models were developed using data from over 3000 permanent sample plots across the province of Nova Scotia, Canada. Model validation with independent field data produced model efficiencies of 0.38 and 0.60 for the predictions of BA and volume increments, respectively. The models are applicable to predict tree growth in mixed species, even- or uneven-aged forests in Nova Scotia but can easily be calibrated for other climatic and geographic regions. Artificial neural network models demonstrated better prediction accuracy than conventional regression-based approaches. Artificial intelligence techniques have considerable potential in forest growth and yield modelling.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".