Evaluating Height‐Age Determination Methods for Jack Pine and Black Spruce Plantations Using Stem Analysis Data
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Six height‐age determination methods (Graves, Lenhart, Carmean, Newberry, ratio, and ISSA) were evaluated for their accuracy and sensitivity to sample size in determining height‐age pairs using stem analysis data from plantation-grown black spruce (Picea mariana[Mill.] B.S.P.) and jack pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb.) trees from Ontario, Canada. Twenty-three disks (sections) were used from 102 jack pine and 93 black spruce trees each for evaluation. The Graves, ratio, and Newberry methods were unbiased for determining height‐age pairs forboth black spruce and jack pine across the site productivity gradient and different crown classes. However, on the basis of the magnitude of height prediction bias, reconstructed tree profiles, and the amount of information required for height‐age determination, the Graves method withat least 13 stem sections is recommended for height‐age determination.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it