MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143860799 · doi:10.1093/forestry/cpp026

Development of a tree-specific stem profile model for white spruce: a nonlinear mixed model approach with a generalized covariance structure

2009· article· en· W2143860799 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yuqing Yang, Shengxiang Huang, Shawn X. Meng

Bibliographic record

VenueForestry An International Journal of Forest Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsAlberta Environment and Protected Areas
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsStatisticsTree (set theory)CovarianceAutocorrelationMixed modelResidualRandom effects modelBayesian information criterionHeteroscedasticityPopulationCalibrationAlgorithmMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A variable-exponent stem profile model was developed for white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) trees in Alberta using a nonlinear mixed model approach. Between-tree variation in stem diameter was best captured by incorporating three random parameters into the model. Heterogeneous residual variances were modelled as a power function of tree breast height diameter. Within-tree residual autocorrelation was modelled through a covariance structure. Based on model fitting statistics, the four-banded toeplitz (TOEP(4)) and the spatial power structures were both selected for further evaluation. An independent validation dataset was used for evaluating the calibration accuracy of the final model in stem diameter and volume predictions. To make tree-specific calibrations, one or more prior diameter measures should be available from each tree. For this study, four scenarios were evaluated, in which one, two, three and four prior diameters were randomly selected for predicting random parameters by an approximate Bayesian estimator. Tree-specific calibrations were subsequently derived. Population-level predictions were also produced for comparison. The TOEP(4) structure was better in general than the spatial power structure for predicting stem diameter and total tree and section volumes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations34
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForestry An International Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207