Modeling boreal forest response to climate variability in central Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the importance of short-term climate variability when simulating forest succession using ecological process models. A version of the FORSKA2 forest gap model was modified for use with daily climate data and applied along a transect of sites crossing the boreal region in central Canada, including the aspen-parkland and forest-tundra ecotones where impacts of climatic change on forest ecosystems could be particularly significant. The model's sensitivity to forcing with daily climate observations compared to monthly mean and long term averages of monthly mean climate data was investigated. Inclusion of daily climate (minimum and maximum temperature and total precipitation) improved the simulations of key characteristics of present-day forest along the transect, and was particularly important at the ecotones. The results demonstrate that changes in variability associated with future change in mean climate are likely to be important when trying to predict boreal forest responses to projected future climate change. Ideally, the use of projected daily climate data or data based on the statistical characteristics of daily climate is highly recommended for future impact studies. A number of approaches to further improve the functioning of the model are also presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".