MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3007627884 · doi:10.1177/0959683620902230

New frontiers in tree-ring research

2020· article· en· W3007627884 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Holocene · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDendrochronologyMultidisciplinary approachDendroclimatologyEcologyTree (set theory)Resource (disambiguation)GeographyFocus (optics)HoloceneComputer scienceArchaeologySociologySocial scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From its inception as a scientific discipline, tree-ring research has been used as a trans-disciplinary tool for dating and environmental reconstruction. Tree-ring chronologies in some regions extend back many thousands of years, opening up new potential for the study of climate, people, and ecology at annual and sub-annual resolution. As such, they are a frequently used resource for a diverse range of studies spanning the Holocene. They are also the focus of a constantly evolving array of analytical techniques and multidisciplinary approaches to research questions. This literature review discusses case studies at the cutting-edge of interdisciplinary tree-ring research, notes recent breakthroughs and limitations, and identifies key frontiers for the future of tree-ring research.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.309
Threshold uncertainty score0.919

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.217 · 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