MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150953291 · doi:10.1071/wf11153

Modelling the effects of surface and crown fire behaviour on serotinous cone opening in jack pine and lodgepole pine forests

2012· article· en· W2150953291 on OpenAlexaff
Martin E. Alexander, Miguel G. Cruz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Wildland Fire · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrown (dentistry)Pinus contortaCanopyEnvironmental scienceFire regimeAtmospheric sciencesForestryBotanyEcologyGeologyGeographyEcosystemBiologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A methodology has been developed for defining the various threshold conditions required for the opening of serotinous cones and viable seed release in the overstorey canopies in jack pine (Pinus banksiana) and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia) forests on the basis of fireline intensity and, in turn, rate of fire spread and fuel consumption. The extent of the effects to the overstorey canopy (i.e. crown scorch height and flame defoliation) and the type of fire (i.e. low- to high-intensity surface, intermittent crown and active crown) vary at any given fireline intensity level and are principally a function of foliar moisture content, canopy base height, stand height and canopy bulk density. The viability of the seed stored in serotinous cones of the two pine species begins to decreases once the flame-front residence time at the ground level of an active crown fire exceeds 50 s.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 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

Citations49
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Wildland FireSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207