MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998458407 · doi:10.14214/sf.411

Stand dynamics modelling approaches for multicohort management of eastern Canadian boreal forests

2004· article· en· W1998458407 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSilva Fennica · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-TémiscamingueCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForest managementForest dynamicsTaigaBorealForest ecologyDisturbance (geology)Tree (set theory)Environmental resource managementGeographyVegetation (pathology)Adaptive managementEcologyEnvironmental scienceForestryEcosystemMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<ja:p>The objective of this paper is to discuss approaches and issues related to modelling stand dynamics for multi-cohort forest management in eastern Canadian boreal forests. In these forests, the interval between wildfires can be rather long, and the development of natural forest stands may include the establishment, growth and mortality of several cohorts of trees. Later cohorts are characterised by increasing structural complexity, including spatial heterogeneity and irregular tree size distribution. A multi-cohort forest management framework has been proposed to maintain this complexity, and associated biodiversity, on the landscape. Multi-cohort forest management planning requires forecasts of the development of stands with complex structure in response to silvicultural treatment and to natural disturbance, but current stand dynamics models in the region are applicable mainly to even-aged mono-specific stands. Possible modelling approaches for complex stands include i) the adaptation of current whole-stand growth and yield models, ii) distance-independent, empirically-derived individual-tree models, such as the USDA Forest Service Forest Vegetation Simulator, and iii) distance-dependent, empirically-derived or process-oriented individual-tree models. We conclude that individual-tree models are needed because observational data for fitting whole-stand models are not available for the full array of silvicultural treatments and natural disturbances encompassed by multi-cohort forest management. Predictive accuracy is a concern with individual-tree models, and the incorporation of coarse-scale constraints into these models is a promising means to control error.</ja:p>

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.192 · 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