MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075331420 · doi:10.5558/tfc84330-3

The FORWARD Project: Objectives, framework and initial integration into a Detailed Forest Management Plan in Alberta

2008· article· en· W2075331420 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Ellie E. Prepas, Gordon Putz, Daniel W. Smith, Janice M. Burke, J. Douglas MacDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of AlbertaAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Innovation Trust
KeywordsWatershedEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)WetlandSurface runoffWater tableRiparian zoneForest managementSoil waterWatershed managementEcologySoil scienceGeologyGroundwaterAgroforestryComputer scienceHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Forest Watershed and Riparian Disturbance (FORWARD) project input into the Millar Western Forest Products Ltd. Detailed Forest Management Plan consists of three main components: 1) watershed and stream layer maps and associated datasets; 2) soil and wetland layer maps and associated datasets; and 3) a lookup table that permits planners to determine runoff coefficients (the variable selected for hydrological modelling) for functional first order watersheds, based upon various site factors and time since disturbance. The watershed and stream layer component includes a hydrological network, a Digital Elevation Model, and Strahler classified streams and watersheds for functional first and third order watersheds in the entire Millar Western Forest Management Agreement area. Relatively coarse mineral soils (which drain quickly) and wetlands (which retain water) were the key features that needed to be identified for the FORWARD modelling effort; therefore, the soil and wetland layers represent a combined soil texture and wetland coverage. The runoff coefficient lookup table integrates predictions of hydrologic impacts of harvest into planning. Key words: forest management, watershed, hydrology, stream, soils, wetlands, modelling

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207