MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Flight speeds of two seabirds: a test of Norberg's hypothesis

2005· article· en· W1521920574 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueIbis · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRange (aeronautics)WingIncubationBiologyZoologyWing loadingEcologyAnimal scienceEngineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Norberg suggested that birds should increase their flight speed when rearing chicks in order to maximize chick energy intake by reducing commuting time. We measured the incubation and chick‐rearing flight speeds of a medium‐range (Brünnich's Guillemot Uria lomvia ) and long‐range (Northern Fulmar Fulmarus glacialis ) forager near the Prince Leopold Island colony, Nunavut, Canada. The mean flight speed for the long‐range forager was significantly higher during chick‐rearing than during incubation. The medium‐range forager showed no difference in mean flight speed during the two periods. We suggest that because petrels fly close to their minimum power velocity and have a low wing‐loading, whereas alcids fly close to their maximum range velocity and have a high wing‐loading, petrels have a greater ability than alcids to alter their flight speed according to changes in the demands of different breeding stages. Consequently, whereas Northern Fulmars adapt to the additional cost of chick‐rearing partially by altering flight speed, Brünnich's Guillemots can only do so by reducing mass.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0080.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.223 · 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