MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138771997 · doi:10.1644/06-mamm-s-333rr.1

The Northern Flying Squirrel (<i>Glaucomys sabrinus</i>): a Conservation Challenge

2007· article· en· W2138771997 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter D. Weigl

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mammalogy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
KeywordsEcologyRange (aeronautics)GeographyDisjunctHabitatThreatened speciesBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The northern flying squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus) has an extensive range in North America, inhabiting boreal, coniferous, and mixed forests of the northern United States and Canada and the slopes of the mountains of the east and west. Most undisturbed northern populations are apparently thriving, but those in the southern mountains are considered disjunct relicts occupying declining remnants of suitable habitat. It is clear that range contraction in the past has been associated with climate and vegetation change in the Pleistocene and the large-scale timber harvests of the early 20th century and that today a significant threat comes from forest practices and development. However, the major problem in dealing with conservation of this species is understanding its complex ecological position in its regional communities and the subtle as well as obvious influences of human activities. Thus, to preserve this species over its extensive range one will have to consider its various roles as a biological opportunist, an important prey item, a disperser of mycorrhizae, a potential victim of biological warfare, and a small, secretive glider especially vulnerable to anthropogenic and possible climatic changes in the size, arrangement, and quality of its home forests.

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)0.003
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 score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.212 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations53
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of MammalogySame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207