Ten-Year Response of Sugar Maple–Yellow Birch–Beech Stands to Selection Cutting in Québec
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Experimental blocks were established in five regions of southern Québec to determine the response of hardwood stands to selection cutting. The blocks contain five control stands (no cut) and five treated stands, composed mainly of sugar maple in association with yellow birch and American beech. Treated stands were harvested using single tree selection to a residual density varying from 16.8 to 21.2 m2. Results obtained 10 yr after treatment demonstrate that the annual gross growth rate was not significantly different between treated and control stands. However, net annual growth rate was higher in four out of five cut stands, because the annual mortality rate was less in these stands than in controls. Cutting significantly enhanced the growth of stems with an initial diameter at breast height (dbh) of 10 to 28 cm and favored the development of sugar maple saplings in all blocks and yellow birch saplings in three blocks. North. J. Appl. For. 18(4):119–126.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it