MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975112026 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v129i2.1705

Editor’s Report for Volume 128 (2014)

2015· article· en· W1975112026 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Carolyn C. Callaghan, Trina Rytwinski

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicTardigrade Biology and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaCalifornia Department of Fish and WildlifeMinistry of Natural ResourcesTrent UniversityU.S. Geological SurveyUniversity of TorontoUniversity of AlbertaAcadia UniversityYork UniversityNorth Carolina State UniversityGwich'in Renewable Resources BoardSusquehanna UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsVolume (thermodynamics)PhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One hundred and thirty-five years is a long time for any endeavour, but an unbroken record of independently publishing a scientific journal for this length of time by a non-profit organization is a remarkable feat.As the oldest natural history society in Canada, the Ottawa Field-Naturalists' Club has much to be proud of in its pub lication of The Canadian Field-Naturalist since 1880.Volume 128 of The Canadian Field-Naturalist exemplifies the important role of this journal as a forum for dispersing science on the distribution, taxonomy, biology, behaviour, ecology, and conservation of species across a broad range of taxa in North America.In volume 128, topics included distribution of species from under-surveyed regions in Canada, population decline of species-at-risk, landscape ecology, ethology, migration, impact of drought and anthropogenic activities, habitat use, morphological variation, and improved meth ods for field biology.The Canadian Field-Naturalist also continued to publish tributes on the lives of remarkable naturalists, which remains an important contribution to natural history.Mailing dates for issues in volume 128 are as follows: 26 March 2014; 8

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.679
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.204 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicTardigrade Biology and EcologyFrench-language works237,207