MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7097703185

A microfiche edition of this publication may be purchased from:

2016· article· en· W7097703185 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroformListing (finance)Subject (documents)Index (typography)Cover (algebra)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scientific, technical, and interpretive publications written by staff of the Northern Forestry Centre during 1987-90 are listed alphabetically by author. A subject index is provided for the main entries. In addition there is an appendix listing reports prepared under the federal-provincial forestry development agree ments for Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. RESUME Ce document enumere alphabetiquement (par auteur) les publications scien tifiques et techniques ainsi que les ouvrages de vulgarisation qui ont ete rediges par Ie personnel du Centre de foresterie du Nord ou pub lies par Ie Centre entre 1987 et 1990. Un index des sujets est presente pour les notices principales. on y trouve egalement a l'annexe une liste des rapports prepares dans Ie cadre des ententes federales-provinciales sur la mise en valeur des ressources forestieres signees avec l ' Alberta, la Saskatchewan et Ie Manitoba. iii iv PREFACE The Northern Forestry Centre has produced a wealth of forest research litera ture since it opened in 1970. Earlier general bibliographies cover research from the former Manitoba-Saskatchewan region prior to 1968 (Hildahl et al. 1968) and for

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient 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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.7690.550

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.234
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForest Management and Policy→French-language works237,207→