MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2014339534 · doi:10.1139/f06-055

Translating restoration scenarios into habitat conditions: an initial step in evaluating recovery strategies for Chinook salmon (<i>Oncorhynchus tshawytscha</i>)

2006· article· en· W2014339534 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Krista K. Bartz, Kerry M. Lagueux, Mark D. Scheuerell, Tim Beechie, Andrew D. Haas, Mary Ruckelshaus

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Marine Fisheries Service
KeywordsOncorhynchusChinook windHabitatFisheryPopulationRestoration ecologyEcologyEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental resource managementFish <Actinopterygii>Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the challenges associated with recovering imperiled species, such as Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), is identifying a set of actions that will ensure species' persistence. Here we evaluate the effects of alternative land use scenarios on habitat conditions potentially important to Chinook salmon. We first summarize the alternative scenarios as target levels for certain land use characteristics. We then use the target levels to estimate changes in current habitat conditions. The scenarios we explore indicate considerable potential to improve both the quality and quantity of salmon habitat through protection and restoration. Results from this analysis constitute the habitat inputs to a population model linking changes in habitat to salmon population status. By transparently documenting the approach we use to translate land use actions into changes in salmon habitat conditions, we provide decision makers with a clear basis for choosing strategies to recover salmon.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations45
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→