MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100471466

Impacts of wildlife viewing on moose use of a roadside salt lick.

2002· article· en· W2100471466 on OpenAlex
Judith K. Silverberg, Peter J. Pekins, Robert A. Robertson

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAlces · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNocturnalMorningWildlifeTime of dayGeographySalt lakeEcologyBiologyAnimal science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In northern New Hampshire, we examined the use patterns of moose visiting a roadside salt lick before (1996) and after (1997-1999) a blind was built specifically to view moose at the lick. Moose visitation patterns were monitored with trail monitors equipped with cameras placed on trails leading into the study and control salt licks. There was no difference in frequency of use and time of use at the study and control sites in any year. Nocturnal use was higher than diurnal use; use was greatest at 2200-2400 and 0400-0600 hours at both sites. Reduced use of the trail closest to the blind indicated that placement of the blind probably altered access patterns of certain moose. A trend in 1998-1999 toward more visits during early morning than peak afternoon viewing time indicated that assessment of viewing opportunity warrants further study. ALCES VOL. 38: 205-211 (2002)

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)0.000
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.706

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.203
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.023 · 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