MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3128715672 · doi:10.2737/pnw-gtr-614

Climate change, carbon, and forestry in northwestern North America: proceedings of a workshop November 14-15, 2001 Orcas Island, Washington.

2004· report· en· W3128715672 on OpenAlexafffund
David L. Peterson, John L. Innes, Kelly O'Brian

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersU.S. Forest ServicePacific Northwest Research StationUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of WashingtonU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsClimate changeForestryGeographyCarbon fibersAgroforestryEnvironmental scienceEcologyBiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interactions between forests, climatic change and the Earth's carbon cycle are complex and represent a challenge for forest managers -they are integral to the sustainable management of forests.In this volume, a number of papers are presented that describe some of the complex relationships between climate, the global carbon cycle and forests.Research has demonstrated that these are closely connected, such that changes in one have an influence not only on the other two, but also on their linkages.Climatic change represents a considerable threat to forest management in the current static paradigm.However, carbon sequestration issues offer opportunities for new techniques and strategies, and those able to adapt their management to this changing situation are likely to benefit.Such changes are already underway in countries such as Australia and Costa Rica, but it will probably take much longer for the forestry sector in the Pacific Northwest region of North America (encompassing Oregon, Washington, Montana, Idaho, British Columbia and Alaska) to change their current practices. Climatic ChangeClimate is dynamic and is always changing.Around 15,000 years ago, much of the northern half of North America was covered by ice sheets; today only tiny remnants remain.Several sources of information, including both direct measurements and proxy evidence, have revealed that temperatures in the northwest of North America are increasing.Mote (this volume) reviews what we know about recent changes in the climate of the Northwest.During the 20th century, average annual temperature warmed by 0.6°C on the coast of British Columbia, 1.1°C in the interior and 1.7°C in the northern part of the province (Mote 2003).The temperature changes recorded in, for example, Fort St. James in British Columbia during the 20th century match very closely in pattern the changes in sea-surface temperatures recorded globally (Coulson 1997).These changes are reflected in the number of growing degree days, which increased by 16 percent in northeast British Columbia, by 13 percent on the Coast and in the southern interior, and by 5 percent in the central interior.Lakes and rivers are becoming ice-free earlier in the year, and the water temperatures of the Fraser River have increased.A number of glaciers in British Columbia (Brugman et al. 1997) and northern Washington (Granshaw 2002) have shrunk in size.Precipitation in southern British Columbia has been increasing by 2 to 4 percent per decade, primarily in the winter, and a 50 percent increase has been recorded in northeastern Washington and southwestern Montana during the 20th century.By 2100, temperature increases of between 1.4°C and 5.8°C relative to 1990 are expected.Globally, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC 2001) predicted higher maximum temperatures (very likely), higher minimum temperatures (very likely), reduced diurnal temperature ranges (very likely), more intense precipitation (very likely, over many areas), and increased risk of drought (likely, in mid-latitude continental interiors).The actual nature of climatic change at a particular site will depend on a variety of local factors, and considerable efforts have gone into downscaling the results of global models to individual regions.Such downscaling is considerably more difficult in mountainous areas, with clear implications for northwestern North America.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.003

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForest ecology and management→French-language works237,207→