MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Map of Forest Management in Canada, 2017 version

2019· dataset· en· W7083002727 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueGEOSCAN · 2019
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic, financial, and policy analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForest managementForest coverPlan (archaeology)Forest inventoryProtected areaLand coverForest structureSustainable forest management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forests cover large areas of Canada but only some of these forests are actively managed. The Map of Forest Management in Canada, 2017 version, provides a generalized classification of forest management in Canada, including: protected areas, Treaty/Settlement Lands (including Treaty Lands identified in Final Agreements, Land Claim Agreements and Settlements), Indian Reserves, other federal reserves (including military training areas), provincial and territorial reserves and restricted use areas, private lands, short- and long-term Crown forest tenure areas and areas with no current Crown timber dispositions. The Managed Forest Map of Canada dataset provides a wall-to-wall classification of lands in Canada. It does not differentiate areas of forest from non-forest. The Managed Forest Map of Canada differs from maps defining the area designated as “managed forest” for greenhouse gas inventory reporting purposes and does not replace those maps. Instead, the Managed Forest Map of Canada shows areas that are currently managed, as of June 2017, and provides generalized management type classification for those areas. Collaborating agencies plan to update the dataset periodically as needed, and remain open to receiving advice from experts concerning refinement priorities for future versions.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.188 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGEOSCANSame topicEconomic, financial, and policy analysisFrench-language works237,207