MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1543937445 · doi:10.2981/wlb.2002.011

Expectations and realities of GPS animal location collars: results of three years in the field

2002· article· en· W1543937445 on OpenAlexafffund
Chris J. Johnson, Douglas C. Heard, Katherine L. Parker

Bibliographic record

VenueWildlife Biology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsMinistry of EnvironmentUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersMinistry of EnvironmentUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsGlobal Positioning SystemCollarPurchasingGeographyEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceTelecommunicationsOperations managementBusinessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

GPS collars have the potential to automatically collect large numbers of relatively accurate animal relocations. Collar costs, levels of accuracy, and satellite signal reception have been reported by other studies, but there has been little discussion of long‐term performance under field conditions. Between March 1996 and April 1999, we placed 11 GPS collars on 23 individual woodland caribou Rangifer tarandus caribou for a total of 26 collar deployments. Reliability was highly variable; some collar deployments operated normally for their expected period of time, other deployments functioned for less than half of their expected lives. Collars attempted 41,822 locations and collected 15,247 3‐D and 10,411 2‐D locations, for an average acquisition rate of 59%. We recommend that researchers carefully consider project objectives, budget constraints, and available options such as differential correction and remote collar communication, before purchasing GPS collars.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations67
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWildlife BiologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207