MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131212258 · doi:10.1002/wsb.85

Do GPS clusters really work? carnivore diet from scat analysis and GPS telemetry methods

2011· article· en· W2131212258 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michelle Bacon, Greg M. Becic, Mark T. Epp, Mark S. Boyce

Bibliographic record

VenueWildlife Society Bulletin · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredationCarnivoreGlobal Positioning SystemTelemetryBiomass (ecology)UngulateGeographyWildlifeFisheryBiologyEcologyHabitatComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Global Positioning System (GPS) data collected using radiocollars have allowed researchers to identify sites where predators have killed prey, but this method has yet to be compared with scat analysis, a more traditional method of determining diet composition. We analyzed 211 scat samples and compared composition of prey items with 266 kill sites found using GPS radiotelemetry data on cougars ( Puma concolor ) in the Cypress Hills of southeast Alberta and southwest Saskatchewan, Canada. Scat and kill site results showed significantly different occurrences of prey items; scat samples were better able to detect small mammals. However, larger prey made up >90% of the biomass of cougar diets, and when restricting the comparison to ungulate prey, both methods estimated nearly identical biomass consumed. As expected, GPS telemetry is biased against small prey but the method provides results comparable to scat analysis for larger prey that make up the majority of biomass consumed. © 2011 The Wildlife Society.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient 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 score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations65
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWildlife Society BulletinSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207