Carbon accumulation in Colorado ponderosa pine stands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Woody encroachment and thickening have occurred throughout the western United States and have been proposed as important processes in the US carbon (C) budget despite large uncertainty in the magnitude of these effects. In this study we investigated ponderosa pine encroachment near Boulder, Colorado. We reconstructed a time series of forest structure to estimate changes in C storage by the trees. Advantages of this technique include the ability to estimate changes in C stocks over time with a single series of measurements (i.e., no historical measurements), and the ability to calculate accumulation rate changes through time. Substantial variation occurred in the C amounts and accumulation rates among the three plots resulting from differences in slope, aspect, and soil conditions. Accumulation rates increased exponentially as trees increased in size and additional trees established within the plots, and were highly variable among plots (0.090.7 Mg C·ha1·year1 during 19802001). These rates were less than those used in studies of the US carbon budget, and only by assuming no mortality for the densest stand could we generate a projected rate in 2050 that was similar. Thus, time since the initiation of encroachment and rate of encroachment are variables that should be considered for accurately computing the continental C budget.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".