A new sampling strategy for forest inventories applied to the temporary clusters of the Swedish national forest inventory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new sampling strategy for forest inventories is presented. The most important difference from the traditional sampling strategies is that auxiliary variables from remote sensing are incorporated into the sampling design. The sample is selected to match population distributions of the auxiliary variables as well as possible. This is achieved by a double sampling approach, where auxiliary variables are extracted for a large first-phase sample. The second selection is done by the local pivotal method and produces an even thinning of the first-phase sample. Thus, we make sure that the selected second-phase sample becomes much more representative of the population than what is possible by the use of traditional designs. The potential of implementing the new strategy for the temporary clusters within the Swedish national forest inventory is evaluated with five auxiliary variables: the geographical coordinates, elevation, predicted tree height, and predicted basal area. The increased representativity that we achieve with the new strategy induces up to 95% reduction of the variance of the sample means of the remote sensing auxiliary variables compared with traditional designs. For this reason, we conclude that the new strategy that will be implemented in the forthcoming Swedish national forest inventory has a great potential to achieve large improvements in estimation of many important forest attributes.
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".