Bibliographic record
Abstract
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
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.175 | 0.114 |
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".