MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2938254499 · doi:10.1093/forsci/fxz008

Potential for Sugar Maple to Provide High-Quality Sawlog Trees at the Northern Edge of Its Range

2019· article· en· W2938254499 on OpenAlexafffund
François Guillemette, Steve Bédard

Bibliographic record

VenueForest Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des Forêts
FundersMinistère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs
KeywordsMapleSilvicultureYellow birchSugarRange (aeronautics)ForestrySelection (genetic algorithm)Environmental scienceAgroforestryBiologyBotanyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The management of sugar maple (Acer saccharum) at the northern edge of its range is mainly oriented toward timber production, from trees of higher grades. However, both the quality of mature trees in natural stands and how the quality may vary depending on the silvicultural treatment are unknown, especially under northern conditions. The objective of this study was to describe the variation in stem quality of mature maple trees (diameter >33 cm) according to climatic, geographic or soil variables, and to evaluate the effects of a first selection cutting cycle on this quality. Annual temperature (1.7–4.1° C) was the most important variable explaining differences in the proportion of higher-grade trees, with a 16 percent gain associated with every additional increase in degrees Celsius. The practice of a first selection cutting was associated with an 11 percent gain in this proportion. Although the actual proportion of high-quality trees was below 35 percent on the coolest sites, a proper tree selection through silviculture could likely improve this proportion in future decades, whereas the potential effects of climate change are unclear.

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)0.001
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueForest ScienceSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207