MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1884107206 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2013-0407

Integrating standing value estimations into tree marking guidelines to meet wood supply objectives

2014· article· en· W1884107206 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Filip Havreljuk, Alexis Achim, David Auty, Steve Bédard, David Pothier

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des Forêts (Québec)Université Laval
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesFPInnovations
KeywordsHardwoodYellow birchForestryEnvironmental scienceIdentification (biology)SilvicultureAgroforestryBiologyMathematicsPulp and paper industryBotanyGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The identification of low-vigor trees with potential for sawlog production is a key objective of tree marking guidelines used for partial cuts in northern hardwoods. The aim of this study was to measure the impact of various vigor-related defects on the monetary value of hardwoods. To achieve this, we sampled 64 sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marshall) and 32 yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis Britton) trees from two locations in southern Quebec, Canada. We identified over 420 defects, which were grouped into 8 categories. The trees were then harvested and processed into lumber, and the value per unit volume of each stem was calculated from the value of the product assortment (lumber, chips, and sawdust). We found that visible evidence of fungal infections (sporocarps and (or) stroma) and cracks had the largest negative influence on value in both species. A model that included these defects was almost as good at predicting value as one that included a specifically designed quality classification. A more accurate assessment of value could be achieved using wood decay assessment tools and (or) by considering site-specific variables. Results from this study showed that visual identification of fungal infections and cracks could be used to enhance tree marking guidelines for hardwoods. This would meet both the silvicultural objective of selection cuts, by removing low-vigor trees, and the wood supply objective, by improving stem quality assessment prior to harvest.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations38
Published2014
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207