MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983497195 · doi:10.1139/x01-099

Forest inventory: further results for optimal sampling schemes based on the anticipated variance

2001· article· en· W1983497195 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Daniel Mandallaz, Adrian Lanz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSampling (signal processing)Variance (accounting)StatisticsMathematicsSampling designMathematical optimizationForest inventoryEconometricsComputer scienceForestryForest managementEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents optimal allocation rules for two-phase, two-stage sampling schemes in which the sampling density and the costs of the second phase can vary over domains. The optimality criterion is based on the anticipated variance. It also gives an improved version of discrete approximation for the resulting inclusion probabilities. An example illustrates the theory.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.066
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.066
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.007
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.209 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
DomainMethods
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

Citations11
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207