Effects of Spatial Boreal Forest Harvesting Practices on Efficiency through a Benchmarking Approach in Eastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In eastern Canada, harvesting practices and spatial organization of harvested sites are modulated according to ecosystem forest management objectives. We determined how spatial organization affects efficiency by evaluating wood procurement costs. A comparative analysis of efficiency was presented using a non-parametric technique, i.e., data envelopment analysis (DEA), which allows multiple variable analyses of different factors. A database of 50 harvested sites during the period 2015–2018, located along a north-south latitudinal gradient between 46° to 50°, was constructed with variables describing spatial organization (roads and dispersion of patches) and operational aspects (wood procurement costs). The evaluated financial efficiencies show high values greater than 70%. The causes of inefficiency were dispersion of the patches, distance to the mill, and the number of kilometers of built roads. When efficiency values were arranged by latitudinal location, northern sites exhibited a lower value of overall and scale efficiency due to the high values in the wood harvested, and developed road density of the zone.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".