MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W125599783 · doi:10.2172/944995

Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) Report : Priest River, 2004-2005 Technical Report.

2005· report· en· W125599783 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ray Entz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHabitatWarblerGeographyGooseShrubEcologyCarexVegetation (pathology)ForestryGrasslandBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On July 6, 2004, the Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) was used to determine baseline habitat suitability on the Priest River property, an acquisition completed by the Kalispel Tribe of Indians in 2001. Evaluation species and appropriate models include bald eagle, black-capped chickadee, Canada goose, mallard, yellow warbler, and white-tailed deer. Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) values were visually estimated and agreed upon by all HEP team members. The Priest River Project provides a total of 105.41 Habitat Units (HUs) for the species evaluated. Conifer forest habitat provides 26.95 HUs for bald eagle, black-capped chickadee, and white-tailed deer. Grassland habitat provides 23.78 HUs for Canada goose and mallard. Scmb-shrub vegetation provides 54.68 HUs for mallard, yellow warbler, and white-tailed deer.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0510.026

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRangeland and Wildlife Management→French-language works237,207→