MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411209441 · doi:10.5539/jas.v17n7p61

Mathematical Modeling of Olive Trees Age: Case Study of ‘Mehras’ Variety in Kathraba Village in Karak Governorate

2025· article· en· W4411209441 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Majeda Thniebat, Saleh Al-Shdefat, Akram Garalleh, Mohammad Rathaan Almajali, Riziq Saeed Al Balawnh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAfrican Botany and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)GeographyBiologyStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores methods for estimating the approximate age of Olea europaea (Mehras variety) in Kathraba, Ay District, Al-Karak Governorate, Jordan. Traditional methods for age estimation are often imprecise and time-consuming. Although the Pannelli algorithm is well-established, this research integrates it with mathematical modeling, machine learning, and remote sensing techniques to enhance accuracy and practicality. Data on tree dimensions, environmental conditions, and growth traits were collected and analyzed. Results indicate a strong correlation between physical characteristics and estimated age. Single-trunk trees had a maximum mean estimated age of approximately 1,025 years, with a trunk circumference of 13 meters. Multi-trunk trees showed a slightly higher mean estimated age of around 1,030.5 years, possibly due to the complexity of growth patterns rather than actual age differences. The highest estimated age reached 1,242 years based on basal stump perimeter (maxTD), while the lowest perimeter measurements were recorded below the trunk bio-fraction at height HPM. A significant relationship was observed between base diameter, basal stump measurements, and cumulative branch dimensions with the perimeter (PM) of each trunk. To reduce variability, the arithmetic mean of four age estimates was used as the final age value.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicAfrican Botany and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207