Standardized monitoring of Rangifer health during International Polar Year
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Monitoring of individual animal health indices in wildlife populations can be a powerful tool for evaluation of population health, detecting changes, and informing management decisions. Standardized monitoring allows robust comparisons within and across populations, and over time and vast geographic regions. As an International Polar Year Initiative, the CircumArctic Rangifer Monitoring and Assessment network established field protocols for standardized monitoring of caribou and reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) health, which included body condition, contaminants, and pathogen exposure and abundance. To facilitate use of the protocols, training sessions were held, additional resources were developed, and language was translated where needed. From March 2007 to September 2010, at least 1206 animals from 16 circumpolar herds were sampled in the field using the protocols. Four main levels of sampling were done and ranged from basic to comprehensive sampling. Possible sources of sampling error were noted by network members early in the process and protocols were modified or supplemented with additional visual resources to improve clarity when needed. This is the first time that such broad and comprehensive circumpolar sampling of migratory caribou and wild reindeer, using standardized protocols covering both body condition and parasite disease status, has been done.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 it