Ageing and decline of trembling aspen stands in Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The onset of stand decline is a critical stand development characteristic that can affect both harvesting schedule and annual allowable cutting volume. The age at which stand decline begins was assessed in trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) stands in the province of Quebec, Canada, by three different methods. The first used a data source consisting of 1081 temporary sample plots from which a segmented regression model was fitted to detect any deviation from the self-thinning line. This type of deviation was observed below densities of 720 stems/ha, which is normally attained around age 60 on good-quality sites. The second used a data source composed of 34 permanent sample plots that allowed us to calculate the age at which the periodic annual increment was equal to zero. The estimated age at which stands began to decline averaged 64 years, but the large variation around this mean was poorly explained by site factors. The third method used a data source consisting of 98 inventory plots. Volume of tree mortality and of wood decay showed an important increase when stand age was around 60. Hence, the results from three independent sources of data converge toward a generalized loss of aspen volume around age 60. However, the prediction of the age at which decline begins in any particular aspen stand is imprecise and requires an on-site measurement of the stand state.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".