Multi-scale Cover Selection by White-tailed Deer, <em>Odocoileus virginianus</em>, in an Agro-forested Landscape
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resource selection studies are commonly conducted at a single spatial scale, but this likely does not fully or accurately assess the hierarchical selection process used by animals. We used a multi-spatial scale approach to quantify White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus) cover selection in south-central Michigan during 2004–2006 by varying definitions of use and availability and ranking the relative importance of cover types under each study design. The number of cover types assigned as selected (proportional use > proportional availability) decreased from coarse (landscape level) to fine (within home range) scales, although at finer scales, selection seemed to be more consistent. Although the relative importance changed substantially across spatial scales, two cover types (conifers, upland deciduous forests) were consistently ranked as the two most important, providing strong evidence of their value to deer in the study area. Testing for resource selection patterns using a multi-spatial scale approach would provide additional insight into the ecology and behavior of a particular species.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".