Bibliographic record
Abstract
Marteloscopes in the service of close-to-nature silviculture In Switzerland, close-to-nature silviculture is recognised as strategically important. It is part of the management principles prescribed in Article 20 of the Federal Act on Forests. The implementation of this type of silviculture is based on a holistic understanding of the forest, which is considered both as a complex habitat and as a multifunctional production system. Marking is the core activity of forest management. It is an integrative decision-making act at the interface between planning and timber harvesting. Since 2011, the silvicultural department in Lyss has been using marteloscopes for training purposes. They are valued as didactic tools and enable practice of a forest management that is carried out in accordance with the overarching legal objectives of sustainability, naturalness and multifunctionality. Thanks to the georeferencing of the trees and the recording of their characteristics, it is possible to compare the various marking proposals visually and quantitatively. The marteloscope exercises, carried out in a spirit of healthy competition, are one of the pillars of the training of forest professionals.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.008 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".