MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3157583592

Exploring the Urban Forest: Evidence of Tree Condition Change across Toronto’s Environmental Gradient

2020· dissertation· en· W3157583592 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Menilek Sisay Beyene

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2020
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyEnvironmental changeUrban forestForestryTree (set theory)Environmental scienceClimate changeEcologyMathematicsBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasing urbanization creates environmental impacts on flora, fauna, and human populations. Urban trees provide mitigating services that may be maximized by understanding environmental stressors that impact tree health. I explored the relationship between tree condition and urban landcover as evidence of urban stressors. Tree morphology, canopy condition, and insect abundance were expected to vary across an urban land cover gradient, at different spatial scales, and between native/exotic species. These responses were explored in Tilia americana, Tilia cordata, Acer platanoides and Acer saccharnium in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Specific spatial scales and environmental variables better explained changes in tree response variables. My results suggest Tilia species were more tolerant of urban conditions. Differences between species were described by genera suggesting species trait similarity may determine environmental suitability. Maximizing service provision requires interspecific stress expression consideration. Further research will explore soil conditions, socio-economic factors, and environmental remote sensing in urban tree condition modelling.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.345
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 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicUrban Green Space and Health→French-language works237,207→