MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036883989 · doi:10.1139/x09-125

Analysis of fine rooting below skid trails using linear and generalized additive models

2009· article· en· W2036883989 on OpenAlex
Jürgen Schäffer, Klaus von Wilpert, Edgar Kublin

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicForest Biomass Utilization and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkid (aerodynamics)Generalized linear modelPoisson distributionMathematicsEstimatorStatisticsAutocorrelationEnvironmental scienceVariogramGeneralized linear mixed modelLinear modelCovarianceSoil scienceEngineeringKriging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soil compaction caused by forest machinery changes the basic conditions for root propagation below skid trails. In consequence, lower fine-root densities have to be expected under wheel tracks compared with other skid trail strata that experience no direct traffic. Explorative data analysis of fine-root densities below a skid trail revealed that the fundamental assumptions for linear modelling were violated. Using a generalized linear model following a Poisson distribution with a log link function for the predictor variables together with an exponential covariance function to cope with spatial autocorrelation, the formal model criteria were met. In contrast to the linear models, generalized additive models provide flexible surface estimators that enable us to model continuous response surfaces. In addition, generalized additive models allow for the calculation of confidence intervals for the estimated density surface and for the use of inferential statistics, such as comparisons between depth gradients of fine rooting at distinct transect locations or depth layers. These model characteristics improve the possibility to recognize differences and to evaluate fine-root disturbances below skid trails without integrating uncertain strata information. They also enhance the options for determining the duration of time that is necessary to restore the rooting capacity on formerly compacted soils.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.901

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.251 · 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