MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1547349028 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v118i2.916

The Barred Owl, <em>Strix varia</em> in Alberta: Distribution and Status

2004· article· en· W1547349028 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Lisa Takats Priestley

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsBirds Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyWildlifeRange (aeronautics)ForestryNest (protein structural motif)EcologyBorealDistribution (mathematics)Species distributionHabitatArchaeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Barred Owl distribution and status in Alberta were investigated using over 300 individual records (1912 through 1999) that were collected from literature, museum/zoo specimens, nest cards, bird surveys, volunteer raptor banders, and naturalists. Barred Owls were distributed throughout much of the boreal forest, aspen parkland, foothill, and mountain ecoregions of Alberta. Fifty-four breeding records (46 nests) were found. Barred Owls were associated with older forests and had a clumped distribution, predominantly along water where larger Balsam Poplar trees provide nesting sites. According to Alberta's "Status of Alberta Wildlife 2000" criteria, the Barred Owl should be assessed as Sensitive. There is no evidence that Barred Owls have expanded their range in Alberta in the last 100 years; rather, they have maintained their distribution.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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