MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004554379 · doi:10.5558/tfc78404-3

Severely repressed lodgepole pine responds to thinning and fertilization:19-year results

2002· article· en· W2004554379 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Craig Farnden, Les Herring

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsGovernment of British ColumbiaPositive Living North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThinningHuman fertilizationExtrapolationYield (engineering)Range (aeronautics)HorticultureBiologyForestryBotanyAnimal scienceMathematicsAgronomyGeographyStatisticsPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A set of speculative and exploratory treatments was applied to a severely repressed strand of 18-year-old lodgepole pine in 1979. After 19 years, various combinations of row thinning, hand thinning and fertilization have provided a remarkable range of results, with the best treatments gaining 3 m in top height and 8 m in apparent site index (reference age 50 years breast height) over the untreated stand. The best results were observed where both growing space and nutrition were improved. Extrapolation of the results using simulation suggests large gains in yield at harvest. Key words: thinning, fertilization, lodgepole pine, repression, stagnation

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.213 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
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

Citations23
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207