MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046591497 · doi:10.5558/tfc79318-2

Développement dun outil de classification de la structure des peuplements et comparaison de deux territoires de la pessière à mousses du Québec

2003· article· en· W2046591497 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Dominique Boucher, Louis De Grandpré, Sylvie Gauthier

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré de Santé et de Services Sociaux des LaurentidesUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlack spruceGeographyForestrySustainable forest managementForest structureBiodiversityForest managementEcologyTaigaCanopyBiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest stand structure is an important element for biodiversity and, from a sustainable forest management perspective, uneven-sized stands should be managed in order to maintain the structural diversity over the landscape. The first objective of this study is to develop a statistical tool to characterize stand structure that can be used in forest management planning. The second objective is to classify the stand structure of two regions to illustrate a possible use for the tool. The statistical tool for characterizing stand structure has been developed from forest inventory data gathered by the ministère des Ressources naturelles du Québec, using discriminant analysis. The analysis makes it possible to classify the stands into three types of structure, even-sized, uneven-sized and inverse J-shaped, with an error rate estimated at only 7%. Proportions of different structure types in Quebec’s eastern black spruce forest region have been compared with those found in the western black spruce forest region. Nearly 90% of the western black spruce forest region is composed of pure black spruce stands, contrary to the eastern black spruce region, where there are more pure fir and mixed spruce-fir stands. Most of the western black spruce forest stands are even-sized (62%), while almost 70% of the eastern black spruce forest stands are uneven-sized or inverse J-shaped. Pure black spruce stands are more even-sized than pure fir stands, but regional differences are also found within pure black spruce stands. Our results show that it is possible to develop a robust tool that makes it possible to classify thousands of stands rapidly. Such tools are required if we want to consider stand structure for appropriate management prescriptions in the boreal forest. Key words: Even- and uneven-sized structure, fire regime, Picea mariana, Abies balsamea, boreal forest, structural diversity

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations83
Published2003
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207