MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1919623338 · doi:10.1139/x11-056

Extracting environmentally driven growth trends from diameter increment series based on a multiplicative decomposition model

2011· article· en· W1919623338 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chaofang Yue, Ulrich Kohnle, Marc Hanewinkel, Joachim Klädtke

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsSeries (stratigraphy)Picea abiesNonlinear systemMultiplicative functionStatisticsNon-linear least squaresDecompositionEconometricsEnvironmental scienceExplained sum of squaresEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study developed a conceptual framework for partitioning the components of diameter increment to potentially detect the influence of environmental changes. This process consisted of two steps. First, a multiplicative decomposition diameter increment model was introduced to evaluate the influence of ageing, site quality, competition status, and thinning effects on individual tree growth. Second, generalized additive models were applied to identify the nonlinear dynamic of growth trends caused by environmental changes. The conceptual framework was then applied to Norway spruce ( Picea abies (L.) Karst.) growing in southwest Germany. The database consisted primarily of tree ring series collected from trees cut from long-term experimental stands. Also, stand-level data were available from periodical remeasurements of these plots. The developed analytical technique effectively removed non-environment-related effects (ageing, site quality, and stand dynamic) from the growth signal provided in the diameter increment series. Growth trends deducted from estimates based on either nonlinear least squares, generalized nonlinear least squares, or nonlinear mixed-effects approaches displayed quite similar patterns. In general, the trend in diameter increment showed a long-term increase from the 1920s into the 1990s with a midterm depression in the 1940s that was followed by a significant decrease in the recent past.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.214 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations21
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207