MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Digital Compendium for: Herbicide alternatives in boreal and northern temperate forests of Ontario and Quebec: A compendium of studies

2024· dataset· en· W6977492265 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2024
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGerman Social Sciences and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompendiumTaigaBorealTemperate climateTemperate rainforestVegetation (pathology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a digital compendium of studies assessing the effectiveness of vegetation management treatments in boreal and northern temperate forests of Ontario and Quebec, Canada. The compendium includes studies meeting specific criteria such as following responses for five years or longer, involving silvicultural experiments, and focusing on tree or vegetation-related metrics. The compendium, classified using a bioregional ecological framework, is open-access and aims to inform decision-making regarding herbicide alternatives and identify areas for further research.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.017
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0990.020

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicGerman Social Sciences and HistoryFrench-language works237,207