MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7099836025

FUTURE CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS ON THE BOREAL FOREST IN NORTHWESTERN ONTARIO IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FORESTRY SECTOR AND THE LOCAL COMMUNITY

2008· article· en· W7099836025 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLanguage and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeTaigaForest managementEffects of global warmingBorealGlobal warmingGlobal changeEcosystem
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. This is a true copy of the thesis, including any required final revisions, as accepted by my examiners. I understand that my thesis may be made electronically available to the public. ii A large body of research has documented evidence of climate change impact already occurring on different systems on earth, future impacts can be expected. Accordingly, research is urgently needed to analyze the potential impacts of climate change on forest ecosystems in order to contribute to better landscape planning and management. This thesis investigates how climate change affects landscape change, and how to use this understanding in the analysis of land-use and landscape planning and management to adapt to climate change impacts. In particular, this study examines how climate change may impact a managed forest in terms of timber availability, and the regional community that relies on it for its survival. I hypothesized that the Boreal forest in north western Ontario will change in the short term (i.e. 60 years) in species composition and will produce less available timber as a result of

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLanguage and CultureFrench-language works237,207