MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100595621

Canadian Forest Products Ltd.

2004· article· en· W7100595621 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicForest Biomass Utilization and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasal areaCanopyDistribution (mathematics)Tree (set theory)ShrubBlock (permutation group theory)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this project was to develop a query to predict the late-winter distribution of mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) in Supply Block F, Prince George Forest District. On the basis of literature review, the following criteria were identified for the development of a query to produce predictive maps of mule deer late-winter distribution: 1) stand composition; 2) age; 3) canopy closure; 4) tree height; 5) tree dbh; 6) basal area; 7) percentage of shrub cover; 8) aspect; and 9) slope. Road surveys conducted in December 2004 identified five locations with deer tracks on the east side of the study area. Tracks were within or near polygons with late-successional, coniferous-deciduous stands dominated by pine or spruce, in association with aspen. Canopy closure was ≥ 50%; tree heights ranged from 24 to>30 m; diameter at breast height, from 24.8 to 31.9 cm. All surrounding stands had a basal area that exceeded 45 m2/ha in merchantable timber, and were located on ≤ 20 % slopes, on west, south-southwest, and north-northeast aspects. Literature review and findings on the local distribution of deer led to the following query: late-successional coniferous-deciduous or coniferous-dominated stands,

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForest Biomass Utilization and ManagementFrench-language works237,207