Post-Fire Canopy Height Recovery in Canada’s Boreal Forests Using Airborne Laser Scanner (ALS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canopy height data collected with an airborne laser scanner (ALS) flown across unmanaged parts of Canada’s boreal forest in the summer of 2010 were used—as stand-alone data—to derive a least-squares polynomial (LSPOL) between presumed post-fire recovered canopy heights and duration (in years) since fire (YSF). Flight lines of the > 25,000-km ALS survey intersected 163 historic fires with a known day of detection and fire perimeter. A sequential statistical testing procedure was developed to separate post-fire recovered canopy heights from pre-fire canopy heights. Of the 153 fires with > 5 YSF, 121 cases (89%) could be resolved to a complete or partial post-fire canopy replacement. The estimated LSPOL can be used to estimate post-fire aboveground biomass and carbon sequestration in areas where alternative information is dated or absent. These LIDAR derived findings are especially useful as existing growth information is largely developed for higher productivity ecosystems and not applicable to these ecosystems subject to large wildfires.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".