MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994641788 · doi:10.4236/ojf.2012.23019

Sustainability and Forest Certification as a Framework for a Capstone Forest Resource Management Plans Course

2012· article· en· W1994641788 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christine M. Watts, Lauren S. Pile, Thomas J. Straka

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Forestry · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityCertificationForest managementCertified woodSustainable forest managementBusinessCurriculumForestryEnvironmental resource managementEcoforestryCapstone courseEngineering managementEngineeringForest ecologyIntact forest landscapeGeographyManagementEnvironmental scienceSociologyEcologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest sustainability is the foundation of forestry and modern forest management. Originally the central concept was sustained-yield and maximum timber production and then multiple-use and other non-timber values gained importance. After the Rio Conference and development of the Montréal Process in the early 1990’s, forest sustainability rapidly gained importance and various forest certification schemes developed to certify forest products that were grown using sustainable forest management. Forest sustainability and forest certification have become critical topics in forestry curricula. The American Tree Farm System is one of the important North American forest certification organizations. Modern forestry curricula often include a capstone course where forest management plans are developed. We describe a capstone course at Clemson University under development that uses the management standards and management plan template of the American Tree Farm System as a framework for students to develop actual forest management plans for local forest owners. The material is integrated into a series of four courses leading up to the capstone course. The course offered a hands-on approach for students to create management plans using actual certification standards and the system’s management plan template. In addition, students received specialized training to qualify as auditors for the certification system. This is an example of forest sustainability being integrated into the forestry curriculum.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.018

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Journal of ForestrySame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207