MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994956501 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2019-0139

Precision of exogenous post-stratification in small-area estimation based on a continuous national forest inventory

2019· article· en· W2994956501 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Helena Haakana, Juha Heikkinen, Matti Katila, Annika Kangas

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorForest inventoryStatisticsMean squared errorSmall area estimationVariance (accounting)National forestEstimationEnvironmental scienceStock (firearms)MathematicsStratification (seeds)Sample (material)EconometricsForest managementGeographyForestryAgroforestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

National forest inventories (NFIs) are designed to provide accurate information on forest resources at the national and regional levels, but there is also a demand for such information at smaller spatial scales. Auxiliary data such as satellite imagery have been used to facilitate small-area estimation. The commonly used method, k-nearest neighbour (k-NN), provides a model-based estimator for small areas, but a design-unbiased estimator for the mean square error is not available. Post-stratification (PS) is an alternative approach to using auxiliary information that allows for design-based variance estimation. In a case study using real inventory data of the Finnish NFI, we applied this method to the municipality level to explore the lower limit to the area for which the key forest parameters, forest area and growing stock volumes, can be estimated with sufficient precision. For PS, we employed exogenous forest resources maps based on the previous NFI round. In the municipalities of the two study provinces, the relative standard errors of total volume estimates ranged from 2.3% to 26.9%. They were smaller than 10% for municipalities with an area of 390 km 2 or larger, corresponding to approximately 100 or more sample plots on forestland. We also demonstrated the usefulness of design-unbiased variance estimation in showing discrepancies between design-based PS and model-based k-NN estimates.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207