MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4210916540 · doi:10.24124/2021/59149

Quantifying key metrics of ecosystem biodiversity in natural and managed sub-boreal forests of British Columbia

2021· dissertation· en· W4210916540 on OpenAlexafffundabout
C. U. Chisholm

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersSustainable Forestry InitiativeUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsChronosequenceBiodiversityCoarse woody debrisGeographySpecies richnessEcologyVegetation (pathology)BorealEnvironmental resource managementAgroforestrySnagEcosystemHabitatEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest management in the central interior of British Columbia has been active for over a century. Industrial forest practices in the region are based on the premise that harvest and subsequent stands regeneration is sustainable, but recent investigations raise questions about long-term ecological sustainability and impacts on biodiversity. I evaluate here, using a chronosequence of forest stands, the impacts of stand harvest on biodiversity status and recovery. Aerial laser scanning is used to enhance analysis and model impacts spatially. I provide a novel assessment of key biodiversity metrics of diversity, richness, abundance, and modeling using linear discriminant analysis and random forest frameworks. Results show that vegetation community composition and coarse woody debris (CWD), a key habitat for numerous taxa, are both impacted by harvest history. Predictive mapping of CWD provides insights and a further tool for decision makers to manage and ensure natural levels of CWD are maintained on the landscape.

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)0.001
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 score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.190 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies→French-language works237,207→