MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113821458 · doi:10.1139/x04-081

Testing for anthropogenic influence on fire regime for a 600-year period in the Jaksha area, Komi Republic, East European Russia

2004· article· en· W2113821458 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Igor Drobyshev, Mats Niklasson, Per Angelstam, Przemysław Majewski

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLunds Universitet
KeywordsDendrochronologyScots pinePhysical geographyPinus <genus>Proxy (statistics)GeographyDendroclimatologyForestryFire regimePeriod (music)Environmental scienceClimatologyEcologyArchaeologyGeologyStatisticsEcosystemBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an attempt to quantitatively evaluate the natural versus anthropogenic signal in site fire histories, the statistical relationship between dendrochronologically dated fire events and tree-ring chronologies (deemed to be an independent proxy for climate variation) was analyzed for 14 sites in a 2600-km 2 area of pine-dominated forests in the Komi Republic (East European Russia) over the period from 1424 to 1954. We developed a cumulative measure of statistical fit between two types of fire events (early- and late-season fires) and ring-width chronologies of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) (total ring- and latewood-width chronologies). For a given site, the statistical fit between fires and tree-ring data tended to decrease with an increasing proportion of unique fire years. Distance from a site to the nearest village (deemed to be a proxy of human impact) explained 50% of the variation in statistical fit between fires and tree-ring data. The fit decreased in the majority of the sites from the earlier (1424–1700) to the later (1700–1960) periods. We interpret this to be a result of increased human impact on the fire regime since 1700 due to intensified colonization of the area.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations40
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207