MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314366426 · doi:10.1139/er-2012-0036

Plant phenological modeling and its application in global climate change research: overview and future challenges

2013· article· en· W2314366426 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersProgram for New Century Excellent Talents in UniversityNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNational Center for Atmospheric Research
KeywordsPhenologyClimate changeEnvironmental scienceEcologyComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plants interact to the seasonality of their environments, and changes in plant phenology have long been regarded as sensitive indicators of climatic change. Plant phenology modeling has been shown to be the simplest and most useful tool to assess phenol–climate shifts. Temperature, solar radiation, and water availability are assumed to be the key factors that control plant phenology. Statistical, mechanistic, and theoretical approaches have often been used for the parameterization of plant phenology models. The statistical approaches correlate the timing of phenological events to environmental factors or heat unit accumulations. The approaches have the simplified calculation procedures, correct phenological mechanism assumptions, but limited applications and predictive abilities. The mechanistic approaches describe plant phenology with the known or assumed “cause–effect relationships” between biological processes and key driving variables. The mechanistic approaches have the improved parameter processes, realistic assumptions, broad applications, and effective predictions. The theoretical approaches assume cost–benefit tradeoff strategies in trees. These methods are capable of capturing and quantifying the potential impacts and consequences of global climate change and human activity. However, certain limitations still exist related to our understanding of phenological mechanisms in relation to (1) interactions between plants and their specific climates, (2) the integration of both field observational and remote sensing data with plant phenology models across taxa and ecosystem type, (3) amplitude clarification of scale-related sensitivity to global climate change, and (4) improvements in parameterization processes and the overall reduction of modeling uncertainties to forecast impacts of future climate change on plant phenological dynamics. To improve our capacity in the prediction of the amplitude of plant phenological responses with regard to both structural and functional sensitivity to future global climate change, it is important to refine modeling methodologies by applying long-term and large-scale observational data. It is equally important to consider other less used but critical factors (such as heredity, pests, and anthropogenic drivers), apply advanced model parameterization and data assimilation techniques, incorporate process-based plant phenology models as a dynamic component into global vegetation dynamic models, and test plant phenology models against long-term ground observations and high-resolution satellite data across different spatial and temporal scales.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.234
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.107 · 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