MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103792535 · doi:10.1093/njaf/24.4.258

Predicted and Observed Sugar Maple Mortality in Relation to Site Quality Indicators

2007· article· en· W2103792535 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNorthern Journal of Applied Forestry · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMapleChristian ministrySample (material)SugarMortality rateQuality (philosophy)ForestryDemographyComputer scienceGeographyEcologyBiologyChemistrySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In response to high mortality rates after selection cutting, the Quebec Ministry of Natural Resources developed a new tree classification system, named MSCR, to better identify trees with high mortality probabilities. The main objective of this article was to verify whether sugar maple mortality is more abundant on poor quality sites than on rich quality sites using (1) sample plots, measured only once, in which mortality is predicted using MSCR, and (2) remeasured sample plots that provide a real cumulative 10-year mortality assessment. The results presented show that sugar maple predicted mortality (based on MSCR) is greater on good sites than on bad sites. This result is in contradiction with our 10-year mortality results and the literature. Combining strong components of MSCR with those of other systems described in the literature, we put forward the conceptual basis for a new classification system for the northern hardwoods.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.232 · 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