Bibliographic record
Abstract
The assembly of information for this book began in the late 1980s at the initiative of the Pacific Forestry Centre, Canadian Forest Service, which enabled W. Stanek to focus on Sitka spruce.His initial compilation was supplemented by additional support from 1989 to 1996 through a contract to Western Ecological Services Ltd., Victoria, from the South Moresby Forest Replacement Account.The publication of this work would not have been possible without the interest, scientific support, and editorial suggestions of R.B. Smith, first as the Pacific Forestry Centre's Scientific Authority for the project and, in 1996, as technical and scientific advisor.In 1994 R. De Jong of the Pacific Forestry Centre also served as Scientific Authority.We also thank F. Nuszdorfer, K. Weaver, and G. Wiggins of the British Columbia Ministry of Forests, who were contract administrators.The suggestions of all these foresters are much appreciated and are now a part of this book.This book incorporates some of the information originally compiled by W. Stanek.We are grateful to him for beginning the assembly of 1980s information about Sitka spruce, at a time when not many foresters in British Columbia were giving attention to this species.This book has also benefited from the input of many other persons.Discussions between W. Stanek and the following persons provided early guidance and information: V. Korelus
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.551 | 0.296 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".