Activity and Movement Patterns of Polar Bears Inhabiting Consolidated versus Active Pack Ice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the influence of ice conditions on activity and movement patterns of polar bears in the Canadian-West Greenland Arctic. We used radiotelemetry data gathered over 11 years (1989-99) from 160 adult female polar bears to test for differences in movement and activity of bears inhabiting active ice and consolidated ice. Bears inhabiting active ice moved more than those inhabiting consolidated ice (12 versus 8 km/day), but their activity throughout the year did not differ (bears of both groups were active for 21% of the day). Differences in activity and movement of bears in the two study areas appeared to be related to differences in predominant ice conditions and presumed prey availability. Seals, particularly juveniles, are most plentiful in spring and summer, when polar bears moved more and were most active. During winter, when juvenile seals were less available in consolidated ice areas, bears in that habitat were less active and moved less than bears in active ice areas. Polar bears have evolved flexible patterns of seasonal activity, movements, and facultative den use as adaptations to different sea-ice environments.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".