MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2101005783 · doi:10.1139/x07-199

Effect of precommercial thinning followed by a fertilization regime on branch diameter in coastal United States Douglas-fir plantations

2008· article· en· W2101005783 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David Briggs, Rapeepan Kantavichai, Eric C. Turnblom

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiameter at breast heightThinningDouglas firCrown (dentistry)MathematicsMean squared errorForestryHuman fertilizationAnimal scienceEnvironmental scienceStatisticsAgronomyBiologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of precommercial thinning in 6- to 13-year-old Douglas-fir ( Pseudostuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco var. menziesii ) plantations with and without fertilization with 224 kg·ha–1nitrogen (N) as urea on the mean diameter of the largest limb at breast height (DLLBH) was modeled. DLLBH is a simple, nondestructive field measurement related to log knot indices used to measure log quality in product recovery studies. Model [1] succeeded in predicting mean DLLBH (RMSE = 2.80 and radj2= 0.84) using only site, initial stocking, and treatment variables. Model [2], which used only mean tree variables, improved on model [1] and was simpler. However, model [3], which used a combination of both groups of variables, produced the best model. Model [4] successfully predicted mean DLLBH using variables that can be measured with light detection and ranging (LIDAR), a high-resolution remote sensing technology. Since the age when the live crown receded above breast height is an important variable in some of the models, model [5] was developed to predict when crown recession above breast height occurs. This study found that mean DLLBH of Douglas-fir plantations can be estimated using variables obtained from stand-level growth models or remote sensing, providing a quality indicator that can be easily measured and verified in the field.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations12
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicForest ecology and management→French-language works237,207→