MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160033114 · doi:10.48044/jauf.2007.026

Oxygen Production by Urban Trees in the United States

2007· article· en· W2160033114 on OpenAlexfundno aff
David J. Nowak, Robert E. Hoehn, Daniel E. Crane

Bibliographic record

VenueArboriculture & Urban Forestry · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoU.S. Department of AgricultureNational Park ServiceU.S. Forest ServiceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOxygenEnvironmental scienceWater qualityProduction (economics)Urban forestryPopulationEnvironmental protectionAtmospheric oxygenGeographyEcologyEnvironmental planningBiologyEnvironmental healthChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urban forests in the coterminous United States are estimated to produce ≈61 million metric tons (67 million tons) of oxygen annually, enough oxygen to offset the annual oxygen consumption of approximately two-thirds of the U.S. population. Although oxygen production is often cited as a significant benefit of trees, this benefit is relatively insignificant and of negligible value as a result of the large oxygen content of the atmosphere. Other benefits of the urban forest are more critical to environmental quality and human health than oxygen production by urban trees.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.706

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 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

Citations51
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArboriculture & Urban ForestrySame topicUrban Green Space and HealthFrench-language works237,207