Provenance-dependent variability of <i>Abies grandis </i>stem form under mountain conditions of Beskid Sądecki (southern Poland)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compared the stem form of different provenances of Abies grandis Lindl. under the mountain conditions of Poland. Seven partial populations of this species, originating from two regions in its natural range, were tested. It was concluded that creating separate stem form models is an effective method for comparing stem forms, because the model curves for the groups under comparison are not affected by tree dimensions. The results of this study showed distinct variation in the tested populations of A. grandis in respect to stem form according to provenance (genotype). These differences are particularly evident between provenances from the different regions determined by Müller (K.M. Müller. 1935. Mitt. Deutcsh. Dendrol. Ges. 44: 54123 and K.M. Müller. 1936. Mitt. Deutcsh. Dendrol. Ges. 47: 82132). In general terms, trees representing provenances from region II are characterized by greater cylindricity in comparison with trees from region I. At equal DBH and height, the volume of trees from regions I was smaller than the volume of trees from region II by an average of approximately 7.6%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".