MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009323142 · doi:10.1139/x02-180

Growth-dependent tree mortality models based on tree rings

2003· article· en· W2009323142 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christof Bigler, Harald Bugmann

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPicea abiesLogistic regressionTree (set theory)Logistic functionCompetition (biology)Growth modelDead treePopulationBiologyEcologyStatisticsForestryMathematicsDemographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mortality is a crucial element of population dynamics. However, tree mortality is not well understood, particularly at the individual level. The objectives of this study were to (i) determine growth patterns (growth levels and growth trends) over different time windows that can be used to discriminate between dead and living Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) trees, (ii) optimize the selection of growth variables in logistic mortality models, and (iii) assess the impact of competition on recent growth in linear regression models. The logistic mortality model that we developed for mature stands classified an average of nearly 80% of the 119 trees from one site correctly as being dead or alive. While more than 50% of the variability of recent growth of living trees can be attributed to the influence of competition, this percentage was only 25% for standing dead trees. The predictive power of the logistic mortality model was validated successfully at two additional sites, where 29 of 41 (71%) and 34 of 42 (81%) trees were classified correctly, respectively. This supports the generality of the mortality model for Norway spruce in subalpine forests of the Alps. We conclude that growth trends in addition to the commonly used growth level significantly improve the prediction of growth-dependent tree mortality of Norway spruce.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.541
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations170
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207