MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2198549164 · doi:10.1101/005009

Data-intensive modeling of forest dynamics

2014· preprint· en· W2198549164 on OpenAlexafffundabout

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2014
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWashington State UniversitySimons Foundation
KeywordsCurse of dimensionalityUncorrelatedDimension (graph theory)Forest inventoryRandom forestForest dynamicsTree (set theory)Sampling (signal processing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Forest dynamics are highly dimensional phenomena that are not fully understood theoretically. Forest inventory datasets offer unprecedented opportunities to model these dynamics, but they are analytically challenging due to high dimensionality and sampling irregularities across years. We develop a data-intensive methodology for predicting forest stand dynamics using such datasets. Our methodology involves the following steps: 1) computing stand level characteristics from individual tree measurements, 2) reducing the characteristic dimensionality through analyses of their correlations, 3) parameterizing transition matrices for each uncorrelated dimension using Gibbs sampling, and 4) deriving predictions of forest developments at different timescales. Applying our methodology to a forest inventory database from Quebec, Canada, we discovered that four uncorrelated dimensions were required to describe the stand structure: the biomass, biodiversity, shade tolerance index and stand age. We were able to successfully estimate transition matrices for each of these dimensions. The model predicted substantial short-term increases in biomass and longer-term increases in the average age of trees, biodiversity, and shade intolerant species. Using highly dimensional and irregularly sampled forest inventory data, our original data-intensive methodology provides both descriptions of the short-term dynamics as well as predictions of forest development on a longer timescale. This method can be applied in other contexts such as conservation and silviculture, and can be delivered as an efficient tool for sustainable forest management.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicForest ecology and management→French-language works237,207→