MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2468272851

Silvicultural recommendations for the management of ponderosa pine forest

2014· article· en· W2468272851 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Martín Alfonso Mendoza Briseño, Mary Ann Fajvan, Juan Manuel Sotelo, Alejandro Velázquez‐Martínez, Antonio Quinonez. Silva

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicScarabaeidae Beetle Taxonomy and Biogeography
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanopyAgroforestryNatural regenerationForestryFellingLitterProduction (economics)Environmental scienceBiodiversityForest managementWood productionRegeneration (biology)SilvicultureLoggingGeographyAgronomyEcologyBiologyEconomicsArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ponderosa pines are the most important timber producing species in Mexico, and they also represent a major portion of the Usa and Canada timber production. These pines form near pure stands with simple and stable stand structure. They suffer only occasional disturbances, and they sustain a limited capacity to hold biodiversity and other senvironmental services. The driving force in the stand dynamics is a need for direct light during all their lives. Most ponderosas can successfully regenerate under partial shade, but they must be released soon afterwards. Seedlings appear almost immediately after upper canopy removal, even in years of poor seed production, as long as a thin litter and duff layer forms a proper seed bed. If no such organic layer in the soil is present, leaving partial shade of 40 to 60 % from the overstory will provide protection until vigorous and uniform regeneration can close crowns. This publication was made possible by the economic support of the National Forestry Commission (CONAFOR).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.009

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicScarabaeidae Beetle Taxonomy and BiogeographyFrench-language works237,207