MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Wildfire Regime in the Boreal Forest and the Idea of Suppression and Fuel Buildup

2001· article· en· W2084891698 on OpenAlexafffund
Edward A. Johnson, Kiyoko Miyanishi, Simon Bridge

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Biology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Natural Resources and ForestryUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTaigaBorealEnvironmental scienceGeographyForestryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The idea of unnatural fuel buildup due to fire suppression causing a change in fire regime has little support for closed-canopy ecosystems such as chaparral and boreal and subalpine forests. The change in fire regime observed in the ponderosa-pine ecosystem results primarily from a change in fuel structure (i.e., development of intermediate-height fuels connecting surface and crown fuels and an increase in crown-fuel continuity and density)...

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations174
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConservation BiologySame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207