MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116036932 · doi:10.1017/s0032247400016818

Censuses of penguin, blue-eyed shag, and southern giant petrel populations in the Antarctic Peninsula region, 1994–2000

2000· article· en· W2116036932 on OpenAlex
Ron Naveen, Steven C. Forrest, Rosemary G. Dagit, Louise K. Blight, Wayne Z. Trivelpiece, Susan G. Trivelpiece

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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolar Record · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPolar Research and Ecology
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeninsulaGeographyPopulationCensusNest (protein structural motif)SeabirdEcologyShetlandBiologyPredationDemographyForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents new census data and population estimates for penguins, blue-eyed shags, and southern giant petrels from 26 sites in the Antarctic Peninsula, collected by the Antarctic Site Inventory from 1994 to 2000. For nine sites, population data or estimates are published for the first time. The newly discovered gentoo penguin population of 215 nests at Herofna Island (63°24'S, 54°36'W) represents the easternmost location where this species has been found breeding in the Peninsula. All three pygoscelid penguins — gentoo, Adelie, and chinstrap — were found breeding at Gourdin Island (63° 12'S, 57° 18'W), the fourth known site where these species nest contiguously in the Peninsula. During the period, significant declines in nesting populations of blue-eyed shag were documented at three northwestern Peninsula locations.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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)0.0040.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.236 · 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