MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6948359288 · doi:10.5063/f1g15z7r

North American tree provenance trial and relevant historical climate data for seven species

2020· dataset· en· W6948359288 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCalifornia Digital Library · 2020
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsOntario Forest Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProvenanceTree (set theory)Variety (cybernetics)Table (database)Climate change

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dataset contains two databases: (1) test_sites_database and (2) trial_results_database. The test_sites_database contains location and climate information for tree provenance trial test sites. The climate information is summarized for the active (planting, measurement) years of the site. The trial_results_database contains the trial results (such as tree height, survival, etc.) for different seed sources associated the tree provenance test sites described in the test_sites_database. It also contains long-term climate summaries for the seed source origin locations. We obtained the trial results from a systemic review of publicly-available scientific studies and appended climate data to facilitate data analysis. Our purpose in providing these datasets is to ensure that the results of a variety tree provenance studies are available for use by researchers and forestry professionals, given how time-consuming and expensive these trials are to establish. When using the data, please also cite the original study. This can be found in the table "Guide to Data Sources", found in the folder "data source information" in both databases. The databases both contain the data in .csv and .txt format.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.034

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.189 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCalifornia Digital LibrarySame topicTree-ring climate responsesFrench-language works237,207