Impact of Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) under Different Management Strategies in Downtown Toronto: Publicly and Privately Owned
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) (EAB) was first introduced into North America during the late 1990s and has since caused devasting economic and ecological impacts. Inventory data in downtown core of Toronto of last ten years were used to quantify impact caused by EAB on urban forest and explore the ash mortality pattern under the management of Harbord Village Residents’ Association (HVRA), University of Toronto St-George Campus (UoT-StGeorge) and the City of Toronto. The results indicate that HVRA lost 52.5%, UoT-StGeorge lost 39.2% and the city lost 44.7% of the ash trees respectively; HVRA lost over 40%, UoT-StGeorge lost over 20%and the city lost 35% of the associated values respectively. All the ash mortality patterns fit the exponential regression model and are predicted to reach 100% by 2019. Although different parties have their own decision criteria when treating ash trees, a comprehensive management strategy can be considered as a better way to reduce the impact caused by EAB.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".