MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165735979 · doi:10.1139/x01-110

Coarse woody debris in forest regions of Russia

2002· article· en· W2165735979 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Olga N. Krankina, Mark E. Harmon, Yuri A. Kukuev, Rudolf F Treyfeld, Nikolai N Kashpor, Vladimir G Kresnov, Viktor M Skudin, Nikolai A Protasov, Mikhail Yatskov, Gody Spycher, Ewgeni D Povarov

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCoarse woody debrisForestryForest inventoryGeographyProductivityDead woodForest managementEnvironmental sciencePhysical geographyEcologyHabitatBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To assess regional stores of coarse woody debris (CWD) in seven major forest regions of Russia, we combined data collected as part of the routine forest inventory with measurements in 1044 sample plots and the results of density sampling of 922 dead trees. The stores of CWD in the western part of Russia (St. Petersburg, Central, Khanty-Mansi, and Novosibirsk regions) were on average lower (14–20 m 3 /ha or 4.0–5.8 Mg/ha) than in the East Siberian and Far Eastern regions (40–51 m 3 /ha or 11.0–14.4 Mg/ha). The difference in CWD stores was particularly large between young forests in two western regions (2.4 Mg/ha in St. Petersburg and 3.4 Mg/ha in the Central region) and in the east (20.4–24.4 Mg/ha). This difference is associated with the prevailing disturbance type: clear-cut harvest in western Russia and natural disturbances in the east. Analysis of variance in CWD stores indicates that region, dominant species, forest age group, productivity class, and interactions of these factors explain 87–88% of the total variance and the strongest effects are for age group and region. Lower stores of CWD within the intensively managed forest regions suggest that further expansion of forest use in many regions of Russia may reduce regional stores of CWD and carbon.

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 score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations73
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207