MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Science Priorities for Reducing the Threat of Invasive Species to Sustainable Forestry

2005· article· en· W2179098968 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elizabeth A. Chornesky, Ann M. Bartuska, Gregory H. Aplet, Kerry O. Britton, Jane Cummings-Carlson, Frank W. Davis, JESSICA ESKOW, Doria R. Gordon, Kurt W. Gottschalk, Robert A. Haack, Andrew J. Hansen, Richard N. Mack, Frank J. Rahel, Margaret A. Shannon, Lisa Wainger, T. Bently Wigley

Bibliographic record

VenueBioScience · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsIdentification (biology)BusinessCertificationProcess (computing)Sustainable forest managementCertified woodEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningAction (physics)Invasive speciesForest managementForestryGeographyEcologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceEconomicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Invasive species pose a major, yet poorly addressed, threat to sustainable forestry. Here we set forth an interdisciplinary science strategy of research, development, and applications to reduce this threat. To spur action by public and private entities that too often are slow, reluctant, or unable to act, we recommend (a) better integrating invasive species into sustainable forestry frameworks such as the Montréal Process and forest certification programs; (b) developing improved cost estimates to inform choices about international trade and pest suppression efforts; and (c) building distributed information systems that deliver information on risks, identification, and response strategies. To enhance the success of prevention and management actions, we recommend (a) advancing technologies for molecular identification, expert systems, and remote sensing; (b) evolving approaches for ecosystem and landscape management; and (c) better anticipating interactions between species invasions and other global change processes.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations146
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioScienceSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207