Les coupes partielles : une alternative à la coupe à blanc dans les peuplements mixtes de sapin baumier et d'épinette rouge en termes de rendement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A non-linear model is proposed to describe the growth evolution in mixedwood stands composed of balsam fir (Abies balsamea (L.) Mill.) and red spruce (Picea rubens Sarg.) following a diameter-limit cutting. All softwood stems having a stump diameter equal to or greater than 18 cm were removed during this cutting. The model approach considers the entire stand where the volumes of the two main species, balsam fir and red spruce, were individually modeled. The model was also calibrated for two forest sites identified using Heimburger (1941) forest sites plant index: Cornus and Oxalis-Cornus. On average, the rotation periods suggested by the model range from 25 to 30 years with yields of 4.0 m3ha–1 ear–1 of merchantable volume. In the Cornus forest site, the diameter-limit cutting enables maximization of the yield while maintaining red spruce dominance. In the Oxalis-Cornus forest site, the volume removal has been too important and residual stands were under optimal growth conditions. Furthermore, the cutting has favoured balsam fir instead of red spruce. A reduction of volume removal and an integral protection of red spruce stems having a diameter less than 35 cm at breast height would enable maximization of the yield and maintain the species proportions. Under the Quebec forest context, the selection method would constitute an adequate operation in stand management of forest sites corresponding to Oxalis-Cornus, while cutting with retention of small merchantable stems would be applicable to stands corresponding to the Cornus site. Key words: red spruce, balsam fir, mixedwood stands, productivity, modelling, partial cutting, yield, composition, silviculture
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".