MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336604279 · doi:10.5558/tfc2015-048

Crown-fibre attribute relationships for enhanced forest inventory: Progress and prospects

2015· article· en· W2336604279 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Arthur Groot, Francesco Cortini, Michael A. Wulder

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrown (dentistry)ThinningRange (aeronautics)Environmental sciencePredictabilityCurse of dimensionalityRemote sensingComputer scienceAgricultural engineeringMathematicsStatisticsForestryGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A five-year project, Crown-Fibre Attribute Relationships (CFAR), was completed by the Canadian Wood Fibre Centre (Natural Resources Canada) to explore the relationships between tree crown characteristics and wood fibre attributes. The CFAR project used a number of data sets distributed across Canada (e.g., silvicultural experiments), providing a range of crown conditions following spacing and thinning treatments. The approaches developed under the CFAR project, along with other relevant research, indicate that is possible to enhance current forest inventories by providing estimates of fibre attributes from crown characteristics of individual trees that can, or are poised to be, captured using remotely sensed data. Predictability was related to the dimensionality of the fibre attributes with models for zero-dimensionality fibre attributes (e.g., DBH) showing RMSE of 10% to 15% of mean values. Also, one-dimensional (e.g., sapwood area) and two-dimensional (i.e., ring area) models quantified longitudinal patterns with low bias. Current values of wood density were not related to crown characteristics; instead, recent research suggests that wood density is regulated by hydraulic and biomechanical constraints. Further evolution of remote sensing technology and related research will help to address the temporal problem posed by two- and three-dimensional fibre attributes.

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 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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207