MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3027601803 · doi:10.15684/formath.10.235

Carbon Dynamics and Optimal Forest Rotation

2011· article· en· W3027601803 on OpenAlexaffabout
Patrick Asante

Bibliographic record

VenueFORMATH · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon sequestrationStock (firearms)Carbon stockTaigaEnvironmental scienceCarbon sinkCarbon fibersNatural resource economicsBorealCarbon dioxideClimate changeEcologyEconomicsForestryGeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carbon sequestration in forests is being considered as a mechanism to slow or reverse the trend of increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. This paper presents the results from a dynamic programming model used to determine the optimal harvest decision for a forest stand that provides both timber harvest volume and carbon sequestration services in the Canadian boreal forest. The primary contribution of this study is that the model incorporates detailed information on carbon stocks in dead organic matter pool (DOM), which have been ignored in stand level economic models. It also considers varying levels of initial DOM stocks. The varying DOM stock has interesting implications because it allows one to establish an initial DOM stock for which a landowner will voluntarily participate in the type of carbon market considered in this study. The results of the study indicate that while optimal harvest age seems to be relatively insensitive to carbon stocks in DOM pool, initial carbon stock levels significantly affect economic returns to carbon management.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.163 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFORMATHSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207