MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167969143 · doi:10.1029/2001gb001508

Simulating past and future dynamics of natural ecosystems in the United States

2003· article· en· W2167969143 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Biogeochemical Cycles · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceVegetation (pathology)Biogeochemical cycleEcosystemClimate changeAtmospheric sciencesBiomass (ecology)Carbon cycleCarbon sequestrationClimatologyPhysical geographyEcologyCarbon dioxideGeographyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Simulations of potential vegetation distribution, natural fire frequency, carbon pools, and fluxes are presented for two DGVMs (Dynamic Global Vegetation Models) from the second phase of the Vegetation/Ecosystem Modeling and Analysis Project. Results link vegetation dynamics to biogeochemical cycling for the conterminous United States. Two climate change scenarios were used: a moderately warm scenario from the Hadley Climate Centre and a warmer scenario from the Canadian Climate Center. Both include sulfate aerosols and assume a gradual CO 2 increase. Both DGVMs simulate a reduction of southwestern desert areas, a westward expansion of eastern deciduous forests, and the expansion of forests in the western part of the Pacific Northwest and in north‐central California. Both DGVMs predict an increase in total biomass burnt in the next century, with a more pronounced increase under the Canadian scenario. Under the Hadley scenario, both DGVMs simulate increases in total carbon stocks. Under the Canadian scenario, both DGVMs simulate a decrease in live vegetation carbon. We identify similarities in model behavior due to the climate forcing and explain differences by the different structure of the models and their different sensitivity to CO 2 . We compare model output with data to enhance our confidence in their ability to simulate potential vegetation distribution and ecosystem processes. We compare changes in the area of drought‐induced decreases in vegetation density with a spatial index derived from the Palmer Drought Severity Index to illustrate the ability of the vegetation to cope with water limitations in the future and the role of the CO 2 fertilization effect.

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.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.198 · 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