Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Ottawa Field-Naturalists’ Club (OFNC) represents an unbroken chain of organized, non-governmental natural history investigation and education dating back to the early days of the city of Ottawa itself. The Club originated in 1863 with the formation of the Ottawa Natural History Society which became the Natural History branch of the Ottawa Literary and Scientific Society in 1870, from which the OFNC formally separated in March 1879. Since that time, it has grown into Canada’s oldest and largest regional natural history organization and has produced a diverse and internationally recognized publication program. Since 1880 The Canadian Field-Naturalist and its predecessors have constituted the scientific core of the OFNC’s publication program, with Trail & Landscape being an important Ottawa Valley publication since the late 1960s. The importance of both publications to the growth and health of the organization is reflected in the major surges in Club membership experienced when each of these publications was established. The focus of membership activities has changed over the history of the OFNC, with enlightened natural resource management, then original scientific research and local exploration directing energies in the early decades. By the early years of the 20th century the publications program become the raison d’etre of the Club, almost to the exclusion of local field activities. A renewed interest in field discovery and the growth of conservation awareness in the 1960s, however, rekindled local activities and re-established the balance which has sustained the organization throughout its history. Natural environment education has remained a critical theme within OFNC programs and activities. Over and above inspiring the professional careers and private interests of thousands of individuals for more than a century, the OFNC has had an important and lasting impact on the conservation of natural environment features and landscapes in Canada and North America.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".