MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158106231 · doi:10.5194/gmd-4-1019-2011

Validation of modelled forest biomass in Germany using BETHY/DLR

2011· article· en· W2158106231 on OpenAlexaff
Markus Tum, Marcel Buchhorn, K. P. Günther, Benjamin C. Haller

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoscientific model development · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsEnvironmental sciencePrimary productionVegetation (pathology)Biomass (ecology)Forest inventoryProductivityAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyRange (aeronautics)Forest managementEcosystemAgroforestryEcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. We present a new approach to the validation of modelled forest Net Primary Productivity (NPP), using empirical data on the mean annual increment, or MAI, in above-ground forest stock. The soil-vegetation-atmosphere-transfer model BETHY/DLR is used, with a particular focus on a detailed parameterization of photosynthesis, to estimate the NPP of forest areas in Germany, driven by remote sensing data from VEGETATION, meteorological data from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), and additional tree coverage information from the MODIS Vegetation Continuous Field (VCF). The output of BETHY/DLR, Gross Primary Productivity (GPP), is converted to NPP by subtracting the cumulative plant maintenance and growth respiration, and then validated against MAI data that was calculated from German forestry inventories. Validation is conducted for 2000 and 2001 by converting modelled NPP to stem volume at a regional level. Our analysis shows that the presented method fills an important gap in methods for validating modelled NPP against empirically derived data. In addition, we examine theoretical energy potentials calculated from the modelled and validated NPP, assuming sustainable forest management and using species-specific tree heating values. Such estimated forest biomass energy potentials play an important role in the sustainable energy debate.

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)0.002
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeoscientific model developmentSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207