MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942948778 · doi:10.5424/fs/2019281-14342

Modelling approaches for mixed forests dynamics prognosis. Research gaps and opportunities

2019· article· en· W2942948778 on OpenAlexaff
Felipe Bravo, Marek Fabrika, Christian Ammer, Susana Barreiro, Kamil Bielak, Lluís Coll, Teresa Fonseca, Ahto Kangur, Magnus Löf, Katarína Merganičová, Maciej Pach, Hans Pretzsch, Dejan Stojanović, Laura J. Schuler, Sanja Perić, Thomas Rötzer, Miren del Rı́o, Martina Đodan, Andrés Bravo‐Oviedo

Bibliographic record

VenueForest Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsCanadian Parks and Wilderness Society
FundersAgentúra na Podporu Výskumu a VývojaMinisterio de Economía y Competitividad
KeywordsForest dynamicsForest managementSustainable forest managementContext (archaeology)Temperate rainforestForest ecologyEnvironmental resource managementEcologyTemperate forestComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceTemperate climateGeographyAgroforestryEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim of study: Modelling of forest growth and dynamics has focused mainly on pure stands. Mixed-forest management lacks systematic procedures to forecast the impact of silvicultural actions. The main objective of the present work is to review current knowledge and forest model developments that can be applied to mixed forests.Material and methods: Primary research literature was reviewed to determine the state of the art for modelling tree species mixtures, focusing mainly on temperate forests.Main results: The essential principles for predicting stand growth in mixed forests were identified. Forest model applicability in mixtures was analysed. Input data, main model components, output and viewers were presented. Finally, model evaluation procedures and some of the main model platforms were described.Research highlights: Responses to environmental changes and management activities in mixed forests can differ from pure stands. For greater insight into mixed-forest dynamics and ecology, forest scientists and practitioners need new theoretical frameworks, different approaches and innovative solutions for sustainable forest management in the context of environmental and social changes.Keywords: dynamics, ecology, growth, yield, empirical, classification.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.142 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations51
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForest SystemsSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207