MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042743386 · doi:10.2134/agronj2013.0164

A Simple Crop Phenology Algorithm in the Land Surface Model CN‐CLASS

2014· article· en· W2042743386 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kuo‐Hsien Chang, J. Warland, Paul Bartlett, M. Altaf Arain, Fengming Yuan

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenologyEnvironmental scienceEcosystemBiomass (ecology)Ecosystem modelTerrestrial ecosystemAgricultural landAtmospheric sciencesLand useRemote sensingAgronomyEcologyGeographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Land surface models are useful tools for estimating the contribution and response to climate change of C dynamics in various terrestrial ecosystems. In many land surface models, plant phenological algorithms are incorporated based on field studies in forests. However, to simulate adequately the C cycle over a large area, there is a need to include and validate algorithms for other ecosystems. The Carbon and Nitrogen‐coupled Canadian Land Surface Scheme (CN‐CLASS) is a land surface model that has been applied successfully to the study of C stocks in forest ecosystems. The objective of this study is to incorporate a simple crop phenology algorithm into CN‐CLASS and validate its ability to simulate C cycles at an agricultural site in southern Ontario, Canada. The model was validated on a corn crop (Zea mays L.) in 2005 and 2008 based on measurements of aboveground biomass and net ecosystem productivity (NEP), as well as a well‐tested agricultural model, DayCENT (the daily time‐step version of the CENTURY model). The modified CN‐CLASS showed similar dynamics of biomass allocation compared with field measurements and DayCENT simulations. Regression analysis indicated that the modifications improved the NEP simulation for a cornfield, with the coefficient of determination (R2) relating simulated and observed NEP increasing from 0.51 in the original CN‐CLASS to 0.78 in the modified model. Other crop species could be further validated to expand the model application to crop rotation studies and large areas covered by forests and crop fields in consideration of land management practices.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.575

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgronomy JournalSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207