MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974608358 · doi:10.14214/sf.456

Improvement of low level bark beetle damage estimates with adaptive cluster sampling

2010· article· en· W1974608358 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sam Coggins, Nicholas C. Coops, Michael A. Wulder

Bibliographic record

VenueSilva Fennica · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPinus contortaInfestationMountain pine beetleHectareDendroctonusForestrySampling (signal processing)Bark beetleBiologyAgroforestryEcologyBark (sound)GeographyAgronomyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detection of low level infestation in forest stands is of principle importance to determine effective control strategies before the attack spread to large areas. Of particular concern is the ongoing mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae (Hopkins) epidemic, which has caused approximately 14 million hectares of damage to lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex. Loud var. latifolia Engl.) forests in western Canada. At the stand level attacked trees are often difficult to locate and can remain undetected until the infestation has become established beyond a small number of trees. As such, methods are required to detect and characterise low levels of attack prior to infestation expansion, to inform management, and to aid mitigation activities. In this paper, an adaptive cluster sampling approach was applied to very fine-scale (20 cm) digital aerial imagery to locate mountain pine beetle damaged trees at the leading edge of the current infestation. Results indicated a mean number of 7.36 infested trees per hectare with a variance of 18.34. In contrast a non-adaptive approach estimated the mean number of infested trees in the same area to be 61.56 infested trees per hectare with a variance of 41.43. Using a relative efficiency estimator the adaptive cluster sampling approach was found to be over two times more efficient when compared to the non-adaptive approach.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSilva FennicaSame topicRangeland and Wildlife ManagementFrench-language works237,207