Bibliographic record
Abstract
The field, work for this investigation was carried out in the summer of 1952, during this time soil samples and field notes were made. Further soil samples were secured in the summer of 1953, The area in which the yellow pine communities were studied was in the Okanagan, Similkameen, Nicola and South Thompson valleys as well as the southern Cariboo in the vicinity of Clinton, The soil samples were air-dried, weighed and the gravel fraction ( particles greater than 2 mm. in diameter) separated by sieve. The gravel fraction was weighed and the percentage determined for each sample. The mechanical analysis was done by means of the Bouyoueos hydrometer Method, following the removal of organic matter by hydrogen peroxide, and carbonates by treatment with hydrochloric acid. The results of the mechanical analysis were expressed in terms of percentages, by weight, of sand, silt and clay on the basis of the soil sample with the gravel removed. Using the textural classification of the United States Department of Agriculture the results were expressed In terms of sandy loam, loam, etc. for each plant community. The ranges in soil texture for each plant community are: Agropyron association - sandy loam to clay loam with extremes of sand and clay. Stipa subassociation - sandy loam. Artemisia subassociation - clay loam. Purshia association – generally sand, occasionally sandy loam. Aristida subassociation- sand to sandy loam. Rhus association - loamy sand with high percentage of gravel. Arctostaphylos association - sandy loam or loamy sand to sand. Arctostaphylos - Calamagrostis association - sand to sandy Calamagrostis association - sandy clay loam to sandy loam. Symphoricarpos association - sandy loam and sandy clay loam.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".