MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024694422 · doi:10.5558/tfc78530-4

Development and evaluation of ecoregion-based jack pine height-diameter models for Ontario

2002· article· en· W2024694422 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Lianjun Zhang, Changhui Peng, Shongming Huang, Xiaolu Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityAlberta Environment and Protected AreasOntario Forest Research Institute
FundersUniversity of AlbertaLakehead UniversityMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsEcoregionJack pineTree (set theory)ForestryGrowth modelEnvironmental scienceForest managementGeographyPinus <genus>Physical geographyEcologyMathematicsBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Chapman-Richards growth function is used to model jack pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb.) tree height-diameter relationships at provincial, regional, and ecoregional levels. The results suggest that the tree height-diameter relationships of jack pine are significantly different among the geographic regions of Ontario, depending on local climatic, soil, and ecological conditions. In light of this study, the provincial and regional height-diameter models are not appropriate for predicting tree heights at the ecoregional level. Further, applying a specific ecoregional model to other ecoregions will also result in significant biases for predicting local tree heights. The ecoregion-based height-diameter models developed in this study may provide more accurate information on tree growth and development to forest resource managers and planners. Key words: Chapman-Richards growth function, permanent sample plot, non-linear extra sum of square method, forest management

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 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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 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

Citations50
Published2002
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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