MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107202259 · doi:10.1139/x07-082

Measurement variability error for estimates of volume change

2007· article· en· W2107202259 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
James A. Westfall, Paul L. Patterson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational errorStatisticsMathematicsVariation (astronomy)Sampling errorVolume (thermodynamics)Systematic errorSampling (signal processing)Measurement uncertaintyAccuracy and precisionEnvironmental scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using quality assurance data, measurement variability distributions were developed for attributes that affect tree volume prediction. Random deviations from the measurement variability distributions were applied to 19 381 remeasured sample trees in Maine. The additional error due to measurement variation and measurement bias was estimated via a simulation study for various components of volume change. In comparison with sampling error, the error due to measurement variation was relatively small. When biases in measurements had contradictory effects on the calculation of individual tree volume, there was little additional error, however, systematic biases produced substantial error increases. The proportion of measurement variation error attributable to diameter at breast height and tree species classification was small relative to that attributable to bole (merchantable) height and percent cull attributes, which composed the preponderance of uncertainty due to measurement variation. The greatest impacts were associated with the accretion component, which was subject to measurement variation and bias at both the initial and subsequent measurements.

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)0.073
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.261
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0730.261
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations24
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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