MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7095106783

Implementing a PrognosisBC Regeneration Submodel for the Complex Stands of Southeastern and Central British Columbia

2015· article· en· W7095106783 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegeneration (biology)Christian ministryReforestationVegetation (pathology)Range (aeronautics)Forest regenerationImputation (statistics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PrognosisBC is a growth and yield computer model, which is an adaptation of the USDA Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS). To date, the model has been calibrated by the Ministry of Forests, for use in a number of Biogeoclimatic (BEC) subzones in the Nelson, Cariboo and Kamloops forest regions. The architecture of the model is such that it is applicable to a wide range of timber types and stand conditions. Natural regeneration is a key component in projecting the dynamics of uneven-aged, mixed species complex stands. However, due to ecological differences, the original Northern Idaho regeneration submodel of FVS was not accurate for use in Southeastern BC. As a result, the current PrognosisBC user policy limits the number of stand entries and the duration of projections following a disturbance. The specific objectives of this research project were: • design a protocol for using imputation techniques to simulate natural regeneration in PrognosisBC; • create the necessary databases (from existing regeneration data) to implement a Nearest Neighbour imputation method in predicting regeneration; and • develop the programming and linkages to PrognosisBC to create a prototype regeneration component. In collaboration with the forest industry in the Cariboo, Kamloops, and Nelson forest regions and

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForest ecology and management→French-language works237,207→