MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101464256 · doi:10.1139/x03-199

Interregional nonlinear heightdiameter model with random coefficients for stone pine in Spain

2004· article· en· W2101464256 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rafael Calama, Gregorio Montero

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatisticsCovariateMathematicsPercentileSampling (signal processing)Mixed modelRandom effects modelPinus <genus>Tree (set theory)EcologyForestryGeographyBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An individual-tree height–diameter model was developed for stone pine (Pinus pinea L.) in Spain. Five biparametric nonlinear equations were fitted and evaluated based on a data set consisting of 8614 trees from 455 plots located in the four most important regions where the species occurs in Spain. Because of the problem of high correlation among observations taken from the same sampling unit, a mixed-model approach, including random coefficients, is proposed. Several stand variables, such as density, dominant height, or diametric distribution percentiles, were included in the model as covariates to explain among plot variability. To determine interregional variability among the regions studied, regional effects were included in the model using fixed dummy variables. Two models, one for inland regions and one for coastal regions, were found to be sufficient to explain regional variability in the height–diameter relationship for the species in Spain. Mixed models allow predictive role in two ways: a typical response, including only fixed effects, and a calibrated response, where random effects are predicted and included in the model from the prior measurement of the height in a subsample of trees. Different alternatives were tested to determine optimum subsample size. Measurement of the height of the 20% largest trees in the plot has been shown to be a useful approach.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 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

Citations313
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207