Rice Creek Research Bulletin No. 5: Annotated Checklist of the Birds of Oswego County and Northern Cayuga County, New York
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The idea for this publication was conceived one day atop Derby Hill at the conclusion of a glorious April day when the skies were crammed with migrants of every description. This flight had involved both high numbers and rare occurrences. As I readied to depart I wished for a data yardstick. Since the only available yardsticks were either the large raw data file maintained by the Region 5 Kingbird editor or 25 years of published reports in the Kingbird, and neither of these was accessible in the field, I was out of luck for that evening. This book is designed to provide that yardstick so that the field observer can compare his or her daily results against previous work. It is an annotated checklist which will aid the observer who is unfamiliar with the general abundance of birds in our area. I also hope that it will serve as a general reference manual which may be carried afield. The data herein were derived primarily from published reports in the Kingbird and from my own field records. Except for a request for data which was mailed in 1976, no intensive attempt was made to collect and review the data in the private files of local observers. Although lack of detailed review of private files has no doubt resulted in errors of omission, it was felt that such errors were the lesser of two possible evils. To thoroughly review personal files would have delayed publication of this volume to perhaps the year 2000, assuming the author was fortunate to live that long. In full realization that some available data may have been omitted, early publication was preferred to an all inclusive summary. The species summaries are based primarily on data through the end of 1977, but in some cases data of particular interest have been included from 1978 and 1979. Yet despite these efforts, this book, as with all such endeavors, is partly obsolete before it is published. It is hoped that this publication will aid further field work resulting in a future revision and updating of this checklist. As the Oswego Area has a relatively brief history of modern field work, a vast amount of knowledge remains to be gained. Even in well worked areas, such as the Lake Ontario shore, relatively little is known. Confounding occurrences, such as hawk flights at Derby Hill in August, shake the foundations of well-considered and cherished ideas about what is occurring in the local bird world. In other less well worked sections of the county data are so scarce that ideas are very difficult to form. Extensive field work remains to be done. I hope that field observers will increase their efforts and contribute to the goal of providing more specific detail in published form. Observers should take time to provide summaries of their raw data. Such summarized data are particularly important for environmental impact assessments. Well-documented information on a favorite birding site could well be an important factor in the site evaluation of a proposed nuclear power plant. I have attempted to make this publication as complete as possible within certain time constraints. However, I fully accept responsibility for any errors. Gerald A. Smith, 1978
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,007 | 0,009 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,123 | 0,038 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».