MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2125912094 · doi:10.1139/x05-193

Estimation of whole-tree kraft pulp yield of <i>Eucalyptus nitens</i> using near-infrared spectra collected from increment cores

2005· article· en· W2125912094 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Laurence R. Schimleck, Peter Kube, Carolyn A Raymond, Anthony J. Michell, Jim French

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEucalyptus nitensPulp (tooth)Kraft processKappa numberEucalyptusKraft paperPulp and paper industryYield (engineering)MathematicsMaterials scienceBotanyComposite materialBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eucalyptus nitens (Deane and Maiden) Maiden (shining gum) is widely grown for kraft pulp production. Improving the kraft pulp yield of E. nitens increases plantation profitability but traditional assessment is slow and expensive, which hinders improvement. Near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy provides a rapid and inexpensive method for estimating pulp yield, but studies have been limited to estimating whole-tree pulp yield using whole-tree composite samples obtained destructively. For whole-tree pulp-yield calibrations to be used non-destructively they must be applied to increment cores. In this study we used a Tasmanian E. nitens whole-tree pulp yield calibration to estimate the whole-tree pulp yields of trees from a site not included in the calibration. This was done using NIR spectra from increment cores and whole-tree composite chips. Predictions of whole-tree pulp yield based on increment cores were better than those obtained using whole-tree composite chips. The accuracy of pulp-yield predictions was greatly improved by adding a small number of prediction-set samples to the calibration sets. Calibrations for estimating whole-tree pulp yield were also obtained using NIR spectra from milled cores and whole-tree composite chips. The calibrations had similar statistics, indicating that it is possible to obtain calibrations for estimating whole-tree pulp yield based on increment-core NIR spectra.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations30
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicForest ecology and management→French-language works237,207→