MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408564164 · doi:10.1007/s11676-025-01834-x

Pathfinder: a tool for operational planning of forest regeneration on clearcuts

2025· article· en· W4408564164 on OpenAlexaff
Linnea Hansson, A. L. Rowell, Mikael Rönnqvist, Patrik Flisberg, Fredrik Johansson, Rasmus Sørensen, Morgan Rossander, Petrus Jönsson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Forestry Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPathfinderRegeneration (biology)ForestryGeographyForest managementEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceBiologyLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Effective forest regeneration is essential for sustainable forestry practices. In Sweden, mechanical site preparation and manual planting is the dominating method, but sourcing labour for the physically demanding work is difficult. An autonomous scarifying and planting system (Autoplant) could meet the requirements of the forest industry and, for this, a tool for regeneration planning and routing is needed. The tool, Pathfinder, plans the regeneration and routes based on the harvested production (hpr) files, soil moisture and parent material maps, no-go areas (for culture or nature conservation), digital elevation models (DEM), and machine data (e.g., working width, critical slope, time taken for different turn angles). The overall planting solution is either a set of capacity constrained routes or a continuous route and could be used for any planting machine as well as for traditional scarifiers as disc trenchers or mounders pulled by forwarders. Pathfinder was tested on eleven regeneration areas throughout Sweden, both with continuous routes and routes based on a carrying capacity of 1500 seedlings. The net operation area, species and seedling density suggestions were deemed relevant by expert judgement in the field. The routes provided by Pathfinder were compared with solutions given by two experienced drivers and a third solution based on the actual soil scarification at the site. Total driving distance did not differ significantly between the suggestions, but Pathfinder included less side-slope driving on steep slopes (≥ 27% or 15°) and medium slopes (15–27%). The chosen threshold value for steep slopes (where side-slope driving should be avoided) affects the routing, and a lower threshold means more turning and longer driving distance. Pathfinder is not only a tool for routing of planting machines, but also helps in planning of traditional regeneration by providing a more correct net area and tree species suggestions based on the growth of the previous stand. It also diminishes the risk of severe soil disturbance by excluding the wettest area in the planning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Forestry ResearchSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207