MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W60203721 · doi:10.1093/jof/103.1.47

Digital Forestry: A White Paper

2005· article· en· W60203721 on OpenAlex
Guang Zhao, Guofan Shao, Keith M. Reynolds, Michael C. Wimberly, T. T. Warner, John W. Moser, Keith Rennolls, Steen Magnussen, Michael Köhl, Hans-Erik Anderson, Guillermo Mendoza, Andreas Huth, Liangjun Zhang, James A. Brey, Yujun Sun, Ronghua Ye, Brett Martin, Fengri Li

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Forestry · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forest Service
FundersPacific Northwest Research StationU.S. Forest ServiceUniversität HamburgPurdue UniversityChinese Academy of SciencesNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaU.S. Department of AgricultureChinese Academy of ForestryUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignNortheast Forestry UniversityWest Virginia UniversityCanadian Forest ServiceDivision of Mathematical SciencesInstitute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of SciencesUniversity of GreenwichNational Science FoundationUniversity of WashingtonDepartment of Forestry and Natural Resources, Purdue UniversitySyracuse University
KeywordsForestrySustainable forest managementCommunity forestryForest managementHost (biology)Sustainable developmentForest ecologyEnvironmental resource managementDigital ecosystemBusinessEcosystemComputer scienceGeographyPolitical scienceEcologyEnvironmental scienceKnowledge management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.503

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.213 · 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