MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2816673090 · doi:10.5539/jas.v10n8p133

Height-Diameter Models for Araucaria angustifolia (Bertol.) Kuntze in Natural Forests

2018· article· en· W2816673090 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Emanuel Arnoni Costa, André Felipe Hess, Danieli Regina Klein, César Augusto Guimarães Finger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAraucariaPrincipal component analysisMathematicsStatisticsNonlinear regressionMean squared errorPosition (finance)Nonlinear systemRegressionRegression analysisEconometricsForestryGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The height-diameter relationship of Araucaria angustifolia trees in different sociological positions (dominant, codominant, dominated) was evaluated in a native forest in the south of Brazil, aiming to find accuracy in its estimation and its use as a component of forest description, growth and yield. The total number of trees of the three sociological positions was 657. Part of these trees of each sociological position was used to estimate the parameters of models, and the remaining for model evaluation. Thus, the objective of this work was to find the best height estimate using nonlinear models, linear with dummy variable, principal component with nonlinear regression, and principal component with mixed nonlinear regression. The criteria for accuracy of fit were adjusted coefficient of determination, root mean square error and mean error. The results showed that the fit using principal component with mixed nonlinear regression obtained consistent results and better accuracy. It showed that height growth capacity depends on the sociological position.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural Science→Same topicForest ecology and management→French-language works237,207→