MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051447923 · doi:10.5558/tfc2013-138

Effect of selective precommercial thinning on balsam fir stand yield and structure

2013· article· en· W2051447923 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Robert Schneider, Jean Bégin, Alain Danet, René Doucet

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des Forêts (Québec)Centre de Géomatique du QuébecUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThinningBalsamForestryEnvironmental scienceContext (archaeology)SilvicultureForest managementAgroforestryMathematicsGeographyBotanyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silvicultural tools such as green retention harvesting and multiple variations of partial cut systems are being developed to implement ecosystem-based forest management. However, very little effort has been expended in developing silvicultural treatments for young stands. Results for a selective precommercial thinning (three thinning intensities and control) covering a 28-year period in a balsam fir-dominated stand are presented. Thinning did not significantly increase stand yield, nor change stand diameter diversity or distribution. Furthermore, diameter distributions and diversity of dead stems also did not differ significantly (P > 0.05) among thinning intensity. More important than intensity effects, statistical differences were found between initial stand densities. Low initial densities had greater yields and more diverse diameter distributions. Nevertheless, for low initial stand densities, light to moderate thinning seemed to increase yield, whereas moderate to heavy thinnings would be appropriate for high initial stand densities. Although selective precommercial thinning does not result in significant changes in stand structure, it could be used as a first step in increasing stand complexity within the context of ecosystem-based management.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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