MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W59595469 · doi:10.1093/wjaf/18.3.207

Development of Height-Age Models for Estimating Juvenile Height of Coastal Douglas-Fir in British Columbia

2003· article· en· W59595469 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gordon D. Nigh, Matthew G. E. Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern Journal of Applied Forestry · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsGovernment of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGompertz functionMathematicsStatisticsSite indexExponential functionPower functionNonlinear regressionDouglas firRegression analysisForestryGeographyMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menzeisii) is an important and abundant tree species in coastal British Columbia. Juvenile height estimates are important for management prescriptions and decisions involving regenerating stands. We used 100 plots to investigate the juvenile height growth of coastal Douglas-fir. The growth patterns of the sample trees were observed by felling and splitting them longitudinally and measuring the height of the annual nodes from the point of germination. Sixty-four plots were used to develop a height model as a function of total age and site index. The Chapman-Richards, Gompertz, and modified exponential and power models were fit using nonlinear least squares regression. The models were tested with the remaining 36 plots. The modified exponential and power equation was the best fitting of the three models. None of the models met the regression assumption of independently normally distributed residuals with a mean of zero and a constant variance. The modified exponential and power model was further analyzed using the complete data set by fitting height growth and incorporating a model for serial correlation in the error term to improve the statistical properties of the model. West. J. Appl. For. 18(3):207–212.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score0.927

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWestern Journal of Applied ForestrySame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207