Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conservation and politics are inextricably linked for the Northern Spotted Owl which lives in economically valuable old-growth coniferous forests. Approximately 8% of the global range is located in Canada, with an estimated population of less than 30 pairs - all residing in the southwest mainland of British Columbia (BC). Historical inventory figures indicate the Canadian population has declined by approximately 46% since 1992, an average annual decline of 7.2%. Extirpation of the Northern Spotted Owl from Canada is likely imminent if the current rate of population decline continues. This species is extremely vulnerable to extirpation because of their small population size (<30 pairs), the need for large amounts of habitat, and low population densities. In BC, high quality habitat tends to be in forests >140 years old and moderate quality habitat occurs in forests 100-140 years old. Loss and fragmentation of habitat to harvesting of oldgrowth forests and degradation of habitat as a result of even-aged management of forests are widely believed to be the primary long term threats to the Northern Spotted Owl throughout the Pacific Northwest. Evidence suggests that management efforts to date have been unsuccessful at reversing the decline, and that more intensive efforts are required.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
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.
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".