MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144976757 · doi:10.5558/tfc83490-4

The influence of forested landscape attributes on hunter site choice and participation

2007· article· en· W2144976757 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Dieter Kuhnke

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceU.S. Forest Service
KeywordsTRIPS architectureValuation (finance)RecreationGeographyMultinomial logistic regressionFoothillsDiscrete choiceRevealed preferenceEnvironmental resource managementForest managementHabitatEcosystem servicesForestryEcologyComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEcosystemBusinessEconometricsEconomicsCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work illustrates the use of a non-timber valuation model linked to a number-of-trips prediction model to examine the significance of various forestland attributes and hunter characteristics on hunting site choice and participation in the Foothills Model Forest in west-central Alberta. Data were obtained through a survey that featured determination of hunting trip locations over a three-year period. Clearcut density, fire density, two access variables and, in particular, habitat suitability for ungulate game species were found to be significant variables that influenced hunter site choice. Welfare estimates determined by the number-of-trips prediction model highlight the applicability of the linked model in presenting a more complete picture of the effects of two landscape change scenarios. These scenarios show how the models could be used by land managers to balance economic and social benefits in a bid to move towards sustainable development of forest resources. Key words: non-timber valuation, revealed preference, habitat suitability, random utility theory, landscape attributes, hunter behaviour, multinomial logit

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207