MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029557823 · doi:10.1080/14888386.2006.9712798

Conservation of Grizzly Bear populations and habitat in the northern Great Bear Rainforest

2006· article· en· W2029557823 on OpenAlexaff
Brian L. Horejsi, Barrie K. Gilbert

Bibliographic record

VenueBiodiversity · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThreatened speciesGeographyHabitatPopulationContext (archaeology)EcologyRainforestEndangered speciesGrizzly BearsExtinction (optical mineralogy)Habitat destructionConservation PlanHabitat conservationFisheryUrsusBiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract There are now at least eleven “threatened” Grizzly population “units” in British Columbia and one quarter of the province is now either without Grizzlies (8%) or occupied by threatened populations (16%). B.C. Grizzly populations are moving toward extinction in more than 25% of the province, an increase in area of more than 200% since 1965. This paper evaluates the Protected Areas (PAs) proposed for the North Coast Plan in the context of published understanding of Grizzly Bear ecology, behavior and movements, population densities, and effective population size. It also investigates the relationship between commercially productive forest and the designation of PAs as well as compares conservation strategies in Alaska's Tongass National Forest (Habitat Conservation Areas, HCAs) and BC's North Coast Plan area PAs. The conservation biology analysis reveals that this North Coast plan is dangerously inadequate and recommendations are made for an additional 3 large and 19 medium-sized PAs.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.177 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiodiversitySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207