Development of regional height to diameter equations for 15 tree species in the North American Acadian Region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Equations that relate individual tree diameter at breast height (d.b.h.) and total height (HT) are important because HT is not widely measured and is often needed to estimate stem volume or predict HT growth. The primary goal of the study was to construct a regional HT to d.b.h. equation (H-D) for 15 tree species of the Acadian Region. Specific objectives were to (1) evaluate performance of the Forest Vegetation Simulator Northeast Variant (FVS-NE) equations, (2) explore suitable model forms and compare the influence of various tree- and stand-level variables on HT prediction and (3) develop species-specific equations that are unbiased across a broad geographic region. Data were available from an extensive database covering Maine, three provinces of the Canadian Maritimes and southern Québec. The study showed that the widely used FVS-NE model had significant prediction biases for all species in the region. The best model form among those evaluated was the von Bertalanffy–Richards (vB-R; commonly referred to as the Chapman–Richards), with added covariates that included crown competition factor, basal area in trees larger than subject tree and a climate-derived site index.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".