MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6912913745 · doi:10.5683/sp3/o8u1gs

ABoVE: Characterization of Carbon Dynamics in Burned Forest Plots, NWT, Canada, 2014

2019· dataset· en· W6912913745 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueBorealis · 2019
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversité LavalWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeserts and xeric shrublandsTaigaVegetation (pathology)Carbon fibersBorealRadiocarbon datingBlack spruceCarbon cycle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This record is for the dataset “ABoVE: Characterization of Carbon Dynamics in Burned Forest Plots, NWT, Canada, 2014” at https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1664. This dataset provides field data from boreal forests in the Northwest Territories (NWT), Canada, that were burned by wildfires in 2014. During fieldwork in 2015, 211 burned plots were established. From these plots, thirty-two forest plots were selected that were dominated by black spruce and were representative of the full moisture gradient across the landscape, ranging from xeric to sub-hygric. Plot observations included slope, aspect, and moisture. At each plot, one intact organic soil profile associated with a specific burn depth was selected and analyzed for carbon content and radiocarbon (14C) values at specific profile depth increments to assess legacy carbon presence and combustion. Vegetation observations included tree density. Stand age at the time of the fire was determined from tree-ring counts. Estimates of pre-fire below and aboveground carbon pools were derived. The percent of total NWT wildfire burned area comprising of "young" stands (less than 60 years old at time of fire) was estimated. This data can be downloaded at https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1664.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.011

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBorealis→French-language works237,207→