MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323543549 · doi:10.5558/tfc2023-006

Forecasting models for Quebec’s lumber demand and exports using multivariate regression technique

2023· article· en· W4323543549 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Mounia Ferguene, Nadia Lehoux, Camélia Dadouchi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrdinary least squaresLasso (programming language)Multivariate statisticsEconometricsPartial least squares regressionSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceRegressionSample (material)Mean squared errorData setRegression analysisDemand forecastingVisualizationGraphicsData miningStatisticsEngineeringOperations researchMachine learningEconomicsMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The business environment of the forest products industry is impacted by a variety of factors that makes it hard to predict the market’s behavior. Moreover, companies operating in this industry are continuously seeking to improve their understanding of the market by transforming available data into valuable knowledge and meaningful forecasts. This paper proposes a methodology to extract and use open data for Quebec’s lumber demand and exports forecasts using multivariate regression techniques. A number of methods were applied to estimate the models’ coefficients using a training data set, namely the Ordinary Least Squares method with a “backward” variable selection approach, LASSO and RIDGE regressions, and the Two-Step Least Squares method. Then their forecast accuracy was tested on an out-of-sample data set. The best selected models in terms of forecast accuracy succeeded in predicting Quebec lumber demand and exports on the testing data set, with a Root Mean Square Error of 0.12 and 0.08 respectively, and a Mean Absolute Error of 0.1 and 0.06 respectively. Furthermore, the developed data visualization tool appeared as a powerful tool to highlight the reliable forecasts generated by the models, while deducing relevant information through interactive graphics. Such a visualization tool could therefore help in better understanding the market when making decisions related to the evolution of lumber demand.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.304
Threshold uncertainty score0.612

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207