MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161303076 · doi:10.18280/ijdne.160211

Diversity of Rattan Species in Production Forest in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia

2021· article· en· W3161303076 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Musdalifah Nurdin, Andi Tanra Tellu, Syech Zaenal

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAgricultural and Environmental Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitas Tadulako
KeywordsCalamusRattanBotanyBiologySpecies diversityEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to explain the diversity of rattan species from production forests in Central Sulawesi. Data collection was carried out with a strip random sampling scheme, in which the sampled strips were 20 x 100 m. Our observation revealed that in the production forest area in Parigi Moutong and Sigi Regencies about 17 species of rattan were identified, which were divided into two genera, each with 14 species of Calamus and 3 species of Daemonorops. The distribution of eleven species was uniform, the distribution of four species was not uniform, and three species had a clumped distribution. The importance of each species varies. There are 8 species with a relatively high mean importance value: Calamus zollingerii (36.62), Calamus ornatus var. celebicus Becc. (24.62), Calamus oodersianus Becc. (23.56), Calamus ornatus var. celebicus Becc. (lambang) (23.49), Calamus didymocarpus (Mart) Becc. (22.99), Calamus inops Becc. (22.25), Calamus sp. (sambuta) (18.00), and Calamus lejocaulis Becc. (15.82), while C. minahassae (dato) has the lowest importance value (6.05). It disclosed, the number of species and distribution of rattan in the production forest of the Central Sulawesi are relatively high and varies.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.229
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

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and EcodynamicsSame topicAgricultural and Environmental ManagementFrench-language works237,207