MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979723834 · doi:10.33915/etd.3533

Landowner Outreach Education Project Evaluation: Connecting New Family Forest Owners with the Professional Forestry Community

2012· dissertation· en· W2979723834 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Megan E. McCuen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsWoodlandBusinessSustainabilityOutreachPopulationWork (physics)GeographyLand useEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The majority of West Virginia's forested land is owned by private family forest owners. These individually owned woodlands significantly impact the whole landscape. Connecting with this population and linking them with services and organizations that offer support is essential as these individuals and families establish their ideal woodland. Absentee landowners, land transfers, and increasing industry and development bring to the landscape a high risk for parcelization and fragmentation. With knowledge and forest management information, many woodland owners can improve the overall health, sustainability, and productivity of these lands.;One of the challenges in promoting sustainable forestry is finding ways to connect with these many thousands of landowners. Direct marketing efforts are used to capture the attention of contemporary consumers to advertise diverse products. We used a direct marketing campaign to offer woodland related information to new landowners in three distinct urbanizing zones in West Virginia. We followed the idea of the Ohio Welcome Wagon in this effort.;The West Virginia Woodland Welcome Wagon began reaching out to new woodland owners through a 10 county pilot program. These new landowners were identified through state tax records and contacted via direct mail. An initial mailing, using postcards, was carried out to allow landowners to request a forestry resource information packet as well as be invited to upcoming workshops. This document will address the findings of a follow up survey conducted six months after the initial mailing.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207