Effects of wood decay by <i>Heterobasidion annosum</i> on the vulnerability of Norway spruce stands to wind damage: a mechanistic modelling approach
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
The increase of wood decay due to the fungal pathogen Heterobasidion annosum is expected to increase the vulnerability of tree stands to wind damage due to the decrease in tree anchorage (by wood decay in roots) and stem strength (by wood decay in stem wood). In this work, we developed a framework to simulate the effects of wood decay by Heterobasidion annosum on the vulnerability of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) stands to wind damage in terms of uprooting and stem breakage. We also demonstrated the model performance by using tree- and stand-level sensitivity analyses. The increase in the amount of wood decay decreased the predicted wind speeds needed for both uprooting and stem breakage of trees and increased the predicted amount of wind damage. The probability of uprooting was higher than stem breakage for infected trees, which was opposite to the findings for the healthy trees. Because of some simplifications in the modelling due to the lack of proper experimental data (e.g., effects of wood decay on strength of roots and stem in Norway spruce), our model may overestimate the risk of wind damage caused by wood decay. Therefore, further model validation is still needed based on experimental research.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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