MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2726498271 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2016-0533

Decomposition rates of surface and buried forest-floor material

2017· article· en· W2726498271 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Cindy E. Prescott, Anya Reid, Shuyao Wu, Marie‐Charlotte Nilsson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForest floorHumusEnvironmental scienceGeologySoil horizonPrecipitationHydrology (agriculture)Soil scienceSoil waterForestryPhysical geographyGeographyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mechanical site preparation is assumed to reduce soil C stocks by increasing the rate at which the displaced organic material decomposes, but the evidence is equivocal. We measured rates of C loss of forest-floor material in mesh bags either placed on the surface or buried in the mineral soil at four sites in different regional climates in British Columbia. During the 3-year incubation, buried forest-floor material lost between 5% and 15% more C mass than material on the surface, with the greatest difference occurring at the site with the lowest annual precipitation. Studies of the long-term fate of buried and surface humus are needed to understand the net effects of site preparation on soil C stocks.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics→French-language works237,207→