MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121853134 · doi:10.5558/tfc81214-2

Monitoring Canada's forests: The National Forest Inventory

2005· article· en· W2121853134 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Mark D. Gillis, A. Y. Omule, T. Brierley

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceNational Council for Air and Stream ImprovementComisión Nacional ForestalU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsForest inventoryEnvironmental resource managementPlan (archaeology)SustainabilitySustainable forest managementNational forestPlot (graphics)Resource (disambiguation)Forest coverForest managementBusinessEnvironmental scienceGeographyForestryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new national forest inventory is being installed in Canada. For the last 20 years, Canada's forest inventory has been a compilation of inventory data from across the country. Although this method has a number of advantages, it lacks information about the nature and rate of changes to the resource, and does not permit projections or forecasts. To address these limitations a new National Forest Inventory (NFI) was developed to monitor Canada's progress in meeting a commitment towards sustainable forest management, and to satisfy requirements for national and international reporting. The purpose of the new inventory is to "assess and monitor the extent, state and sustainable development of Canada's forests in a timely and accurate manner." The NFI consists of a plot-based system of permanent observational units located on a national grid. A combination of ground plot, photo plot and remote sensing data are used to capture a set of basic attributes that are used to derive indicators of sustainability. To meet the monitoring needs a re-measurement strategy and framework to guide the development of change estimation procedures has been worked out. A plan for implementation has been drafted. The proposed plan is presented and discussed in this paper. Key words: Canada, forest cover, inventory, monitoring, National Forest Inventory, re-measurement, panel

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 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

Citations238
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207