MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043907702 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v2n3p113

Financial and Economic Analyses of Conventional and Reduced Impact Harvesting Systems

2009· article· en· W2043907702 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdul Samad Abdul‐Rahim, Mohd Shahwahid Hj. Othman, Zariyawati Mohd Ashhari

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Higher Education, Malaysia
KeywordsNet present valueTotal costEconomic analysisCost–benefit analysisMathematicsPresent valueCost analysisValue (mathematics)EconomicsAgricultural scienceOperations managementBusinessAgricultural economicsFinanceStatisticsEnvironmental scienceOperations researchAccountingMicroeconomicsProduction (economics)BiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the various committed new technology and improve logging activities ascribed in the ‘Logfisher’ Practice (LP) rather than Conventional Practice (CP). The result of cost analysis shows that the cost constitutes under LP is higher than under CP. Incremental average per ha total cost rose by 46.86% to RM13,576/ha. While the incremental average per m3 total cost increased by 57.41% to RM267.80/m3. Hence, CP was slightly more profitable and exceeds the Net Present Value (NPV) of LP. Similarly, the Benefit-Cost Ration (BCR) for CP is better than LP. On the other hand, the result of the economic analysis of 40-year period showed that the LP system (NPV = RM9302/ha) provided a higher level of overalls benefits and welfare to the society as a whole as opposed to CP (NPV = RM8497/ha).

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.247 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207