MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030318267 · doi:10.1139/x02-106

A calibrateable site index model for <i>Pinus kesiya</i> plantations in southeastern Africa

2002· article· en· W2030318267 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kalle Eerikäinen, Danaza Mabvurira, Ladislaus Nshubemuki, Jussi Saramäki

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsSite indexPinus <genus>ForestryIndex (typography)StatisticsMathematicsGeographyAsymptoteCalibrationComputer scienceGeometryBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the study was to develop a site index model for Pinus kesiya Royle ex Gordon plantations in southeastern Africa based on the relationship between the dominant height and stand age. Conversely, analysis of dominant height and age data showed that the growth patterns of plantations were different. In addition, the asymptotes and forms of standwise dominant height curves varied within plantations. In developing a common site index model, instead of using the more common approach of estimating separate dominant height–age models for different plantations or sites, a mean curve approach based on a linear random parameter model with fixed and random parameters was applied. The random parameter model of this study was calibrated by predicting random parameters for the plantation and stand effects, in accordance with the standard linear prediction theory. The analyses showed that the calibration of the dominant height model was an efficient method to obtain reliable dominant height predictions of a stand, particularly when several dominant height–age observations from different stands of a plantation and at least one measured dominant height and stand age of a target stand are available. This is the case in many forest inventories based on temporary samples, i.e., cross-sectional data. The new site index model is a useful tool for use in different mensurational applications, and its properties can efficiently be utilized for example in forest inventories of P. kesiya plantations in southeastern Africa.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations15
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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