MOVEMENT PATTERNS OF BARREN-GROUND WOLVES IN THE CENTRAL CANADIAN ARCTIC
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We collected information on the movement patterns of wolves (Canis lupus) captured within a 30,000-km2 area in the Northwest Territories and western Nunavut. Currently, diamond mining and road construction are occurring in the area used by these migratory wolves for denning. During summers of 1997 and 1998, 23 wolves in 19 different packs were captured and fitted with collar-mounted satellite transmitters. Areas used by these wolves varied seasonally and seemed to correspond to movements of migratory caribou (Rangifer tarandus). Annual home-range sizes (95% minimum convex polygon), averaged 63,058 km2 ± 12,836 SE for males and 44,936 ± 7,564 km2 for females. Wolves began to restrict movements around a den site on the tundra by late April. They did not depart from their summer ranges until late October, after which they followed caribou to their wintering grounds. Straight-line distances from the most distant location on the winter range to the den site averaged 508 ± 26 km during 1997–1998 and 265 ± 15 km in 1998–1999 (P < 0.01). Home range in summer averaged 2,022 ± 659 km2 for males and 1,130 ± 251 km2 for females. No difference was detected between sexes or years. All but 2 of 15 wolves returned to <25 km of a previous den, and 2 wolves returned to the same den site. We believe that human activities that disturb or displace denning wolves, or that alter the distribution or timing of caribou movements, will have negative affects on reproductive success of wolves.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it