MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Will Canadian Policies Protect British Columbia's Endangered Pairs of Sympatric Sticklebacks?

2003· article· en· W2143103772 on OpenAlex

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Conservation and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAustralian Government
KeywordsGasterosteusSticklebackBiodiversityEndangered speciesSympatric speciationGeographyThreatened speciesIUCN Red ListLimnetic zoneEcologyBiodiversity conservationFisheryBiologyHabitatFish <Actinopterygii>Littoral zone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Limnetic-benthic sympatric species pairs of threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus spp.) are unique to lakes of southwestern British Columbia. One pair has gone extinct and the remaining three pairs are listed as endangered. The biodiversity conservation policies that could potentially protect these species are examined. The plight of the stickleback pairs serves as a test of the sufficiency of Canada's constellation of biodiversity conservation policies. This article finds that until very recently not even the combination of national and provincial policies offered unequivocal protection for these species. A new national Species at Risk Act now offers more promise. Nevertheless, a more fundamental issue remains. A misconception concerning the value of biodiversity may be impeding the formulation of adequate policies and plans for biodiversity conservation in general, both in Canada and worldwide.

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 score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

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)0.0160.000

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 head0.170
Teacher spread0.162 · 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