MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966109009 · doi:10.1139/x02-056

Developing a production possibility set of wildlife species persistence and timber harvest value

2002· article· en· W1966109009 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David E. Calkin, Claire A. Montgomery, Nathan H. Schumaker, Stephen Polasky, Jeffrey L. Arthur, Darek J. Nalle

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorth Central Research StationU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsWildlifePersistence (discontinuity)GeographyRange (aeronautics)EcologyBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An integrated model, combining spatial wildlife population and timber harvest and growth models, was developed to explore tradeoffs between the likelihood of persistence of a wildlife species, the northern flying squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus), and timber production on a landscape on the west side of the Oregon Cascade Range. A simplified wildlife model was developed from the fully parameterized spatial wildlife model, using a habitat neighborhood-weighting scheme, for use in the optimization. Simulated annealing, a heuristic optimization technique, was used to solve for harvest schedules that maximized the net present value of timber harvest subject to a target value for likelihood of species persistence over a 100-year planning period. By solving this problem for a range of species persistence targets, a production possibility frontier was developed that showed tradeoffs between timber harvest value and likelihood of species persistence on this landscape. Although the results are specific to the wildlife species and the landscape analyzed, the approach is general and provides a structure for future models that will help land managers and forest planners to understand tradeoffs among competing resource uses.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations88
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207