MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069659830 · doi:10.1080/14888386.2004.9712734

The Coastal Temperate Rainforests of Canada: The need for Ecosystem-Based Management

2004· article· en· W2069659830 on OpenAlexaffabout
Faisal Moola, Dominic A. Martin, B. Wareham, J. Calof, Cheri Burda, P. Grames

Bibliographic record

VenueBiodiversity · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoggingTemperate rainforestRainforestForest managementGeographyEnvironmental resource managementClearcuttingEcosystem managementEcosystem servicesForest ecologyEcosystemForestryEcologyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Central and North Coast and Haida Gwaii/Queen Charlotte Islands regions of British Columbia (B.C.) contain the world's largest remaining areas of intact coastal temperate rainforest. The region has been the focus of intense conflict among environmentalists, forestry companies, First Nations and other interests over the management of these high conservation value old growth forests. Recently completed land use planning processes have recommended increasing protection and improving forest practices on the rest of the landbase to more environmentally responsible methods defined by the guiding principles of Ecosystem Based Management (EBM). Based on an audit of logging plans (silvicultural prescriptions) approved between January 15, 2002 and February 24, 2003, The David Suzuki Foundation recently assessed current logging practices in the region. While forestry companies are not legally obliged to use the recommended EBM standards at this time, our assessment underscores how current logging practices fail to meet agreed-upon EBM standards. Firstly, clearcutting remains the dominant method of logging and where alternative methods have been attempted, in-block retention levels are low. Secondly, little effort has been demonstrated that would protect small fish-bearing streams (including salmonid bearing streams) or their tributaries within managed forest stands.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations12
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiodiversitySame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207