MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2467371573 · doi:10.1139/cjb-2016-0009

Improving plant biomass estimation in the field using partial least squares regression and ridge regression

2016· article· en· W2467371573 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Brian M. Ohsowski, Kari E. Dunfield, John N. Klironomos, Miranda M. Hart

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomass (ecology)RegressionPartial least squares regressionStatisticsRegression analysisBiologyAllometryCollinearitySampling (signal processing)RidgeLinear regressionOrdinary least squaresGeneralized least squaresEcologyMathematicsComputer scienceEstimator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Estimating primary productivity over time is challenging for plant ecologists. The most accurate biomass measurements require destructive sampling and weighing. This is often not possible for manipulative studies that involve repeated measures over time, or for studies in protected areas. Estimates of aboveground plant biomass using allometric equations or linear regression on single plant traits have been used, but tend to have poor predictability both within and across systems, or are limited to specific plant taxa. Here we estimate aboveground plant biomass using multiple collinear plant traits to generate a standard curve specific to the site of interest. Partial least squares regression (PLS) and ridge regression (RR), addressing predictor collinearity, are robust, highly accurate statistical methods to estimate plant biomass across gross differences in plant morphology and growth habit.

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 score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations29
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207