MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1525618982 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v117i2.679

Winter Bird Use of Urban and Rural Habitats in Ontario

2003· article· en· W1525618982 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
P. G. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyHabitatGuildAbundance (ecology)EcologyInsectivoreSpecies diversityBiomass (ecology)Urban ecologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined variation in winter bird diversity, abundance, biomass and species and guild composition on plots in farmland, rural forests, mixed rural habitat, cities and three categories of urban natural areas in southern Ontario. Small (<20 g), insectivorous, upper canopy, bark foraging and forest species were more prevalent in rural mixed habitat, urban natural areas and especially rural forests. Larger (20-100 g), ground feeding and omnivorous birds typified cities and farms. Many bird species classified as forest, forest edge and field species during summer also favored these same habitats during winter. The 52 sample plots can be accurately classified into the seven habitat categories through discriminant analysis using the percentages of small species, insectivores, forest species and alien species. Urban natural areas, forests and mixed rural habitat showed the highest diversity while cities and farms showed the lowest diversity. Both bird abundance and biomass were highest in urban natural areas with open water and urban residential and commercial areas, whereas both were lowest in farmland.

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 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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207