MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153870787 · doi:10.14430/arctic431

Effects of a Diamond Mine on Tundra-Breeding Birds

2010· article· en· W2153870787 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Adam C. Smith, John A. Virgl, Damien Panayi, Allison R. Armstrong

Bibliographic record

VenueARCTIC · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpecies richnessRarefaction (ecology)TundraHabitatEcologyGeographySpecies diversityElevation (ballistics)BiologyEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breeding birds (songbirds, shorebirds, and ptarmigan) were surveyed at the Ekati Diamond Mine in Canada’s Northwest Territories from 1996 through 2003. Surveys were conducted on permanent, 25 ha mine and control plots. Five metrics (relative density of individual species, relative density of all birds, species richness using rarefaction curves, and species diversity using two indices) were used to assess potential impacts up to a distance of 1 km from the mine. Six species were more common on mine plots, and three were more common on control plots. Species diversity was slightly higher on mine plots when measured with Fisher’s alpha index. No other metrics suggested strong impacts. This study suggests that the mine has had a relatively limited impact on the upland breeding bird community within 1 km of the footprint but has provided habitat for at least one synanthropic bird species. Further monitoring of breeding birds on the tundra should include pre-development control data and demographic variables such as reproductive success and survival.

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)0.000
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 score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations17
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueARCTICSame topicRangeland and Wildlife ManagementFrench-language works237,207