GRIZZLY BEAR DEMOGRAPHICS IN AND AROUND BANFF NATIONAL PARK AND KANANASKIS COUNTRY, ALBERTA
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
The area in and around Banff National Park (BNP) in southwestern Alberta, Canada, is 1 of the most heavily used and developed areas where grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) still exist. During 1994–2002, we radiomarked and monitored 37 female and 34 male bears in this area to estimate rates of survival, reproduction, and population growth. Annual survival rates of bears other than dependent young averaged 95% for females and 81–85% for males. Although this area was largely unhunted, humans caused 75% of female mortality and 86% of male mortality. Females produced their first surviving litter at 6–12 years of age (x̄ = 8.4 years). Litters averaged 1.84 cubs spaced at 4.4-year intervals. Adult (≥ 6-years-old) females produced 0.24 female cubs per year and were expected to produce an average of 1.7 female cubs in their lifetime, based on rates of reproduction and survival. Cub survival was 79%, yearling survival was 91%, and survival through independence at 2.5–5.5 years of age was 72%, as no dependent young older than yearlings died. Although this is the slowest-reproducing grizzly bear population yet studied, high rates of survival seem to have enabled positive population growth (λ = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.99–1.09), based on analyses using Leslie matrices. Current management practices, instituted in the late 1980s, focus on alleviating human-caused bear mortality. If the 1970–1980s style of management had continued, we estimated that an average of 1 more radiomarked female would have been killed each year, reducing female survival to the point that the population would have declined.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it