MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037685573 · doi:10.1080/10871200802688532

Nanuk of the Torngats: Human–Polar Bear Interactions in the Torngat Mountains National Park, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada

2009· article· en· W2037685573 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Dimensions of Wildlife · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNational parkGeographyCircumpolar starFaunaEnvironmental protectionArchaeologyEcologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Visitors to Canada's newest national park, Torngat Mountains National Park (TMNP), currently consist of reporters, researchers, tourists, and local Inuit from both Nunatsiavut in northern Labrador and Nunavik in northern Quebec. The national park features spectacular scenery and several types of charismatic mega-fauna, including caribou, whales, and polar bears. Isolated and difficult to access, the park's current approach to managing human–bear interactions, the backbone of which is trained Inuit guides and bear-monitors, has been quite effective. However, as traditional activities by Inuit, and the number of visitors and types of tourists to the area increases, there may be a need by the park management to re-examine current polar bear management strategies. Keywords: aboriginalindigenousparksprotected areaswildlife management

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.420
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.315 · 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