Intra-Seasonal Changes in Height to Diameter Ratios for Lodgepole Pine in the Central Interior of British Columbia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Height to diameter ratio (HDR) has been proposed as an alternative to conventional procedures for assessing competition between crop trees and other vegetation. Yet HDRs vary throughout the growing season due to variations in the rate of change in height and diameter. There is an interest, therefore, in determining variations in HDR within a growing season (intra-seasonal changes) and the time of the year when measurements of HDR should be taken for operational purposes. HDR measurements were taken on five occasions at two lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia) sites in the central interior of British Columbia, from early May to late October through the 1999 growing season. Although the focus of the article is the investigation of intra-seasonal changes in HDR, we also compared August 1999 measurements with August 1998 measurements to determine the variation in HDR between growing seasons (inter-seasonal change). The study involved a completely randomized, one-factor experimental design, with replication over time. The removal of competing vegetation (known as brushing) was the factor. The design consisted of four levels of brushing, replicated three times on each study site. The results indicated that HDRs increased from early May to July and then decreased until October to levels equal to or lower than those obtained in August 1998. The highest HDR values were observed in control plots. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures indicated that treatment (brushing radius) and date of HDR measurement had significant (P < 0.05) effects on the intra-seasonal changes in HDR. The results suggest that HDR measurements should be taken either after mid-August, or before mid-May when changes in HDR are negligible. West. J. Appl. For.18(1):52–59.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it