Models for predicting product recovery using selected tree characteristics of black spruce
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The artificial neural network (ANN) model and five traditional statistical regression models were used to predict four parameters of simulated product recovery (lumber volume, lumber value, chip volume, and total product value) from the stud mill simulation based on three basic tree characteristics of black spruce (i.e., diameter at breast height (DBH), tree height, and tree taper). The ANN model (i.e., the three-layer perceptron with error back-propagation algorithm) performed as well as or better than the five statistical regression models in terms of statistical criteria such as R2, root mean square error, and mean absolute error of predictions. The second-order polynomial with both DBH and tree height predicted the four product recoveries as accurately as the ANN model. This study showed that the ANN model, the second-order polynomial function, and the power function were suitable for the prediction of product recovery using the selected tree characteristics. The models developed in this study allow the estimation of the product recovery of individual trees and of a forest stand before it is harvested. It is evident that these models would be valuable tools for forest resource managers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".