MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1850240613 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v119i2.101

Black Bear, <em>Ursus americanus</em>, Ecology on the Northeast Coast of Labrador

2005· article· en· W1850240613 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Keith G. Chaulk, Søren Bondrup‐Nielsen, Fred Harvey Harrington

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent UniversityAcadia UniversityGovernment of Newfoundland and Labrador
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrsusHabitatEcologyGeographyMontane ecologyBiologyUrsus maritimusDemographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Twenty-three Black Bears (Ursus americanus) were captured, 20 were measured, marked and/or radio collared, in northeastern Labrador, between 1996 and 1997. Bears used sea ice for travel, coastal islands for denning, hunted adult Caribou (Rangifer tarandus), and were the possible cause of Moose (Alces alces) calf mortality. Body sizes were small, median weight of adult females was 48 kg, and the sex ratio for captured subjects was 1:1. Four of six radio-collared females gave birth during the winter of 1997, female reproductive histories suggest delayed sexual maturity. Den entry occurred between October and December 1996; spring emergence occurred between April and May 1997, with estimated denning period ranging from 148-222 days. Visual observations of habitat use by radio collared subjects (n = 10) were not tested statistically but suggest that barren areas are used nearly as much as forest. Location data from three GPS collars deployed on three adult females were analysed using Chi-square goodness-of-fit test with Bonferroni correction; two females appeared to prefer forest habitats (p < 0.05).

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 score0.650
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207