MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077379632 · doi:10.1177/0270467608318121

An Optimization-Based System Model of Disturbance-Generated Forest Biomass Utilization

2008· article· en· W2077379632 on OpenAlexaff
Guy L. Curry, Robert N. Coulson, Jianbang Gan, Maria D. Tchakerian, C. Tattersall Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Science Technology & Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomass (ecology)Disturbance (geology)Environmental scienceAgricultural engineeringLand reclamationProductivityEnvironmental resource managementInteger programmingProcess (computing)Computer scienceEcologyEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Disturbance-generated biomass results from endogenous and exogenous natural and cultural disturbances that affect the health and productivity of forest ecosystems. These disturbances can create large quantities of plant biomass on predictable cycles. A systems analysis model has been developed to quantify aspects of system capacities (harvest, transportation, and processing), spatial aspects of the biomass generation process, and deterioration impacts on biomass quality in the various inventory states (field stands, field-harvested inventories, transportation prepared inventories, and production facility inventories). Optimal decision alternatives can be used to guide responses to reclamation, utilization, mitigation, and control. This is particularly advantageous in insect and disease outbreaks, in which the process may last several years, with varying levels of intensity. The prescriptive system description, assuming capacities are fixed, results in a linear programming model. The time-dependent capacity decision model results in a mixed-integer programming model. The analytical model is developed in detail in this analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Science Technology & SocietySame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207