MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2071723414 · doi:10.1139/x01-148

Structure of high-elevation, old-growth stands in west-central British Columbia

2001· article· en· W2071723414 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Pàl Varga, Karel Klinka

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsAbies lasiocarpaPicea engelmanniiMontane ecologySubalpine forestCanopyElevation (ballistics)Ecological successionTaigaBorealPhysical geographyForestryGeographyEcologyGeologyBiologyMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We described quantitatively the height distributions of three high-elevation, old-growth stands in the Engelmann Spruce – Subalpine Fir zone of west-central British Columbia. The stands were composed of subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa (Hook.) Nutt.), with very few Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii Parry ex Engelm.) trees; had a two-storied canopy; and were multiaged. The height distributions were quantified by fitting curves to the cumulative frequency distributions. The diameter distributions of the study stands were reverse-J shaped and similar to those of other old-growth Engelmann spruce – subalpine fir stands in the Pacific Northwest; however, the height distributions were different, indicating the presence of two canopy layers. We suggest that high-elevation, subalpine boreal, old-growth stands composed of shade-tolerant tree species may display a modal height distribution instead of a reverse-J shape. This structural pattern is suggestive of the transition between the gap-phase and tree-island regeneration models and of the cyclic mode of succession.

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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations8
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies→French-language works237,207→