Pilot methodology

Operational Model v2.0 is Draft and unvalidated. Modules, variables, rules and outputs are specified; weights, thresholds and response functions are deliberately unset until expert review, dataset integration and field calibration are complete. It must not be used for management prescriptions.

Operational v2.0 is a separate model from the dissertation work. Research Model v1.0 — the seven-factor weighted index developed by Jay Gilbert — is retained only as the historical proof of concept and supplies no weights, thresholds or transforms to this model.

• Site Capability · v2.0.0-draft.1

  Whether the physical site can support a continuous-cover structure at all: terrain, soil, moisture and productivity.

  Internal aggregation: not chosen — no operator is assumed while the module is uncalibrated

• Stand Transformation Readiness · v2.0.0-draft.1

  Whether the existing crop can be manipulated safely towards an irregular structure: stability, structure, regeneration potential and health.

  Internal aggregation: not chosen — no operator is assumed while the module is uncalibrated

• Dynamic Windthrow Risk · v2.0.0-draft.1

  Wind risk evaluated dynamically against intervention scenarios rather than as a static site score.

  Internal aggregation: not chosen — no operator is assumed while the module is uncalibrated

• Climate Resilience · v2.0.0-draft.1

  Whether the site and species remain viable across baseline, 2030s, 2050s and 2080s horizons.

  Internal aggregation: not chosen — no operator is assumed while the module is uncalibrated

• Operational and Financial Feasibility · v2.0.0-draft.1

  Whether repeated small-scale interventions are physically and economically deliverable on this holding.

  Internal aggregation: not chosen — no operator is assumed while the module is uncalibrated

• Environmental and Regulatory Sensitivity · v2.0.0-draft.1

  Legal, designation, water, peat, heritage and landscape constraints, and the consenting burden they create.

  Internal aggregation: not chosen — no operator is assumed while the module is uncalibrated

The modules are never averaged. There is no composite index, because averaging a strong site against an unready stand would hide the very constraint the assessment exists to surface.

• Tier 1 — Screening Assessment

  National spatial datasets only. No stand inventory, no field visit.

  Site Capability and indicative Windthrow Risk and Environmental Sensitivity. Stand Transformation Readiness cannot be scored from spatial data alone and is returned as evidence-insufficient.

  A screening result may never be presented as a transformation prescription.

• Tier 2 — Professional Assessment

  Spatial data plus forest inventory and management history supplied by the manager.

  All six modules may be scored where inputs exist, with confidence limited by the modelled/reported nature of the inputs.

  Reported inventory is flagged as reported, never as measured.

• Tier 3 — Verified Assessment

  Field inspection, measured inventory and professional verification with recorded verifier identity.

  All modules, full decision profile, intervention intensity and monitoring plan.

  Only a verified assessment may support an operational prescription.

• Native dataset resolution

  At what resolution was the source dataset originally captured?

• Processing resolution

  Was the value resampled, and does the analysis grid overstate the source detail?

• Dataset age

  How old is the evidence relative to the stand dynamics it describes?

• Measured versus modelled

  Was the value measured, reported or produced by a model?

• Inventory completeness

  What proportion of the module's required variables were supplied?

• Field verification

  Has a professional inspected the stand and signed off the inputs?

• Validation coverage

  Has this module been validated on stands comparable to this one?

• Sensitivity to uncertain inputs

  Would the module result change materially if the uncertain inputs moved within their plausible range?

• · A missing required variable produces “Evidence insufficient”, never a low score.
• · No gap is filled with a default, a national average or an inferred value.
• · Every value carries its own evidence type, measurement date, source and notes.
• · Derived values, such as the height-to-diameter ratio, are computed only when every input is valid.

• · Elevation: Demonstration terrain surface (2020), native resolution 25 m
• · Slope: Demonstration terrain surface (2020), native resolution 25 m
• · Aspect: Demonstration terrain surface (2020), native resolution 25 m
• · Topographic exposure: Demonstration exposure index (2020), native resolution 50 m
• · Soil depth: Demonstration soils mapping (2018), native resolution 100 m
• · Soil texture: Demonstration soils mapping (2018), native resolution 100 m
• · Soil drainage: Demonstration soils mapping (2018), native resolution 100 m
• · Peat presence and depth: Demonstration peat mapping (2018), native resolution 100 m
• · Mean wind climate: Demonstration wind surface (2019), native resolution 250 m
• · Extreme gust exposure: Demonstration gust surface (2019), native resolution 250 m
• · Drought exposure: Demonstration climate baseline (2015), native resolution 1000 m
• · Storm exposure: Demonstration climate baseline (2015), native resolution 1000 m
• · Waterlogging risk: Demonstration climate and soils overlay (2015), native resolution 1000 m
• · Distance to nearest watercourse: Demonstration hydrology network (2021), native resolution 10 m
• · Slope operability: Demonstration terrain surface (2020), native resolution 25 m
• · Erosion risk: Demonstration terrain and soils overlay (2018), native resolution 100 m
• · Designated site overlap: Demonstration designations overlay (2022), native resolution n/a m

• DEMO-STAB-01 — Demonstration: slender stand flag

  Interface test only. The real stability threshold has not been agreed and will be species-, height- and exposure-dependent.

  Mocked condition: Height-to-diameter ratio at or above a mocked value of 80.

• DEMO-WIND-01 — Demonstration: recorded wind damage flag

  Interface test only. Damage severity classes are not yet defined against a validated scale.

  Mocked condition: Previous wind damage recorded as localised patches or extensive.

• DEMO-ENV-01 — Demonstration: deep peat flag

  Interface test only. The operative peat depth threshold is a policy and carbon question, not a mocked number.

  Mocked condition: Peat depth at or above a mocked value of 50 cm.

• DEMO-ENV-02 — Demonstration: designated site overlap flag

  Interface test only. Actual consenting requirements are determined by the competent authority, not this model.

  Mocked condition: Designated site overlap recorded as partial or full.

• DEMO-OPS-01 — Demonstration: watercourse proximity flag

  Interface test only. Statutory setbacks are defined in published water-protection guidance.

  Mocked condition: Nearest watercourse within a mocked distance of 50 m.

• · It produces no composite suitability score.
• · It produces no windthrow probability and no return period.
• · It produces no financial return, yield or valuation.
• · It produces no regulatory determination, licence or consent.
• · It is not a silvicultural prescription and does not replace a field assessment by a qualified forester.

• · Module transforms and class breaks derived from Irish evidence.
• · Rule thresholds validated against Irish windthrow and transformation records.
• · National spatial layers bound in place of the demonstration inputs.
• · Downscaled climate projections for the future horizons.
• · Professional review of every module finding, gathered through the reviewer feedback form.