MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009897342 · doi:10.1139/x06-282

Modelling and prediction of dominant height and site index of Eucalyptus globulus plantations using a nonlinear mixed-effects model approach

2007· article· en· W2009897342 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Yue Wang, Valerie LeMay, Thomas Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEucalyptus globulusSite indexHeteroscedasticityMathematicsAutocorrelationEucalyptusStatisticsEnvironmental sciencePopulationMixed modelEcologyBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A nonlinear mixed-effects model approach was used to model dominant height and site index for Eucalyptus globulus Labill. plantations in southeastern Australia. Mixed effects were considered initially for all three parameters of a modified Chapman–Richards model. Inclusion of random effects improved fitting and accounted for the within-plot heteroscedasticity. To correct for within-plot autocorrelation, a power autocorrelation model allowing for irregular intervals for remeasurements was found to be most appropriate. Additional fertilizer application at age 1 year and a number of environmental variables were related to the fixed-effects parameters, but these were not statistically significant, whereas mean annual rainfall and average daily maximum temperature in July (winter) greatly reduced the residual variability among plots. The resulting nonlinear mixed-effects model combines dominant height and site index prediction into a single model and predicts polymorphic height growth rates on different sites. The model can be used to predict population-mean dominant heights and site indices for different growing conditions of E. globulus plantations using existing information of annual rainfall and daily maximum temperature. When prior measures of dominant heights at several ages are available for a plot, specific random effects can be estimated and localized predictions of dominant height or site index can be obtained.

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)0.002
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 score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

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

Citations68
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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