An Individual-Tree Mortality Model for Complex Stands of Southeastern British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An individual-tree mortality model was developed for major tree species in complex stands (multi-cohort, multiaged, and mixed species) of southeastern British Columbia (BC), Canada. Data for 29,773 trees were obtained from permanent sample plots established in BC. Average annual diameter increment and mortality rates ranged from 0.08 to 0.17 cm/year and from 0.3 to 2.6%, respectively. Approximately 70% of the trees were used for model development and 30% for model evaluation. After evaluating the model, all 29,773 trees were used to fit the final model. A generalized logistic model was used to relate mortality to tree size, competition, and relative position of trees in a stand. The evaluation test demonstrated that the model appears to be well behaved and robust for the tree species considered in this study. For the eight tree species, the average deviation between observed and predicted annual mortality rates varied from −0.5 to 0.7% in the test data. West. J. Appl. For. 20(2):101–109.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".