MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401778648 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2024-0055

Revised historic harvest data improve estimates of the impacts of human activities on reported greenhouse gas emissions and removals in Canada’s managed forest

2024· article· en· W4401778648 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Werner A. Kurz, Ben Hudson, Eric T. Neilson, Max Fellows, M. Hafer, D. MacDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsGreenhouse gasEnvironmental scienceForest inventoryForest managementDisturbance (geology)HectareCarbon sinkEnvironmental protectionForestryAgroforestryClimate changeGeographyAgricultureEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Guidelines for international reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and removals in the forest sector require a land-based approach that includes all lands subject to forest management activities such as harvest, forest inventory, regeneration, management of natural disturbances, and protected areas. The reported net greenhouse gas balance of managed forests is not limited to forest stands resulting from timber harvest and wood product use. Reporting guidelines specify methods to reduce interannual variability in reported emissions attributable to natural disturbances. In Canada, the initial (1990) assignment of all inventoried stands to anthropogenic or natural disturbance reporting categories is determined by the last stand-initiating disturbance. A new compilation of historic (1889 to 1989) harvest data in Canada reduces the area reported in the anthropogenic category by 34 million hectares (20%) in 1990. This area transfer from anthropogenic to natural origin reduces the carbon sink reported as anthropogenic by 113 Mt CO2e yr−1 (56%) in 1990 and by 30 Mt CO2e yr−1 (23%) in 2021.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→