MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028677744 · doi:10.1139/x07-202

The pre-European settlement forest composition of the Miramichi River watershed, New Brunswick, as reconstructed using witness trees from original land surveys

2008· article· en· W2028677744 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Mélanie Aubé

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyDominance (genetics)Riparian forestEcoregionRiparian zoneForestrySnagAbies balsameaWatershedTsugaEcologyHabitatBiologyBalsam

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this investigation was to characterize the pre-European settlement forest composition of the Miramichi River watershed using witness trees to contribute to the definition of a baseline for assessing changes over time in the Acadian forest. The witness tree data were stratified by ecoregion and by ecosite, for the portions of the watershed that are in the Northern Uplands, Continental Lowlands, and Eastern Lowlands ecoregions of New Brunswick, as well as by riparian and inland forest; and pre-settlement forest composition (1787–1847) was compared with current forest composition (1998–2000). The witness tree data constitute evidence that a distinctive riparian forest existed before European settlement and that the difference between riparian and inland forest has lessened. They show that the proportions of Betula spp., Tsuga canadensis (L.) Carrière, Ulmus americana L., and Thuja occidentalis L. have decreased; that the proportion of Acer spp. has increased and that Picea spp. and Abies balsamea (L.) Mill. var. balsamea have maintained their overall dominance of the forest in number of individuals, and have increased it on at least 50% of the watershed area.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score0.740

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 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

Citations14
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207