MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008462831 · doi:10.7202/1015512ar

Suivi de 3 plantes rares de l’estuaire d’eau douce du Saint-Laurent

2013· article· fr· W2008462831 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Hélène Gilbert

Bibliographic record

VenueLe Naturaliste canadien · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAeolian processes and effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEnvironment CanadaParks Canada
KeywordsBiologyForestryHumanitiesGeographyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trois plantes caractéristiques de l’estuaire d’eau douce du Saint-Laurent et en situation précaire ont fait l’objet d’un suivi annuel de 2008 à 2012 : la gentiane de Victorin (Gentianopsis virgata ssp. victorinii), la cicutaire de Victorin (Cicutamaculata var. victorinii) et l’ériocaulon de Parker (Eriocaulon parkeri). Le suivi a été réalisé entre Saint-Augustin-de-Desmaures et l’île aux Grues, dans 10 sites où au moins un de ces taxons était présent. Un dénombrement a été effectué systématiquement dans chaque site et chaque année, à l’aide de 20 quadrats de 1 m2. Les comparaisons interannuelles ont révélé des variations très importantes chez la gentiane de Victorin, des années d’abondance exceptionnelle étant suivies d’années de quasi-disparition. Ces variations n’ont pas pu être expliquées clairement au terme des 5 années de suivi. Les populations de cicutaire de Victorin se sont généralement maintenues. Les effectifs de l’ériocaulon de Parker ont subi une baisse significative dans les 2 populations sises les plus près de la limite aval et septentrionale de l’aire de répartition ; quant aux 2 autres populations étudiées, l’une est demeurée stable et l’autre s’est accrue.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLe Naturaliste canadienSame topicAeolian processes and effectsFrench-language works237,207