MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005946085 · doi:10.5194/gmd-7-1357-2014

IPR 1.0: an efficient method for calculating solar radiation absorbed by individual plants in sparse heterogeneous woody plant communities

2014· article· en· W2005946085 on OpenAlexafffund
Yu Zhang, W. Chen, J. Li

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoscientific model development · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsBiomeEcotoneEnvironmental scienceRadiationAtmospheric sciencesPlant communityEcologyBiologyPhysicsEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Climate change may alter the spatial distribution, composition, structure and functions of plant communities. Transitional zones between biomes, or ecotones, are particularly sensitive to climate change. Ecotones are usually heterogeneous with sparse trees. The dynamics of ecotones are mainly determined by the growth and competition of individual plants in the communities. Therefore it is necessary to calculate the solar radiation absorbed by individual plants in order to understand and predict their responses to climate change. In this study, we developed an individual plant radiation model, IPR (version 1.0), to calculate solar radiation absorbed by individual plants in sparse heterogeneous woody plant communities. The model is developed based on geometrical optical relationships assuming that crowns of woody plants are rectangular boxes with uniform leaf area density. The model calculates the fractions of sunlit and shaded leaf classes and the solar radiation absorbed by each class, including direct radiation from the sun, diffuse radiation from the sky, and scattered radiation from the plant community. The solar radiation received on the ground is also calculated. We tested the model by comparing with the results of random distribution of plants. The tests show that the model results are very close to the averages of the random distributions. This model is efficient in computation, and can be included in vegetation models to simulate long-term transient responses of plant communities to climate change. The code and a user's manual are provided as Supplement of the paper.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.004

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeoscientific model developmentSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207