MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1540181650 · doi:10.1002/zoo.21158

Nutrition of the captive western lowland gorilla (<i>Gorilla gorilla gorilla</i>): A dietary survey

2014· article· en· W1540181650 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueZoo Biology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPurdue Research Foundation
KeywordsGorillaBiologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The successful management of captive animals requires attention to multiple interconnected factors. One critical aspect of the daily life of a captive animal is the recommended and/or provisioned diet. This study focuses on the diets of zoo-housed gorillas. A national survey of diets among zoo-housed gorillas was conducted to examine diets being offered to captive gorillas in the United States and Canada. This survey serves as a follow-up to a 1995 dietary survey of zoo-housed gorillas and goes further to quantify nutritional profiles at responding institutions. Results are encouraging, as zoos have made clear improvements in dietary nutrient profiles offered over the past 15 years. However, we suggest that zoological and sanctuary institutions follow Gorilla Species Survival Plan (SSP) recommendations and work to continuously improve diets provided, which could improve gorillas' health and well-being.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.283 · 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