MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2235269163 · doi:10.1644/12-mamm-r-046.1

<b>Harvey, M. J., J. S. Altenbach, and T. L. Best.</b>2011 Bats of the United States and Canada. 1st ed. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 202 pp. ISBN-978-1-4214-0191-1, price (paper), $24.95

2012· article· en· W2235269163 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael A. Bogan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mammalogy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This book, as the authors note, “is an updated and expanded version” of their 1999 booklet, “Bats of the United States.” Indeed, the book reviewed here is new and improved; it covers considerably more facets of bat biology, updates details of life history, occurrence, and nomenclature of the 47 species (plus 4 species of accidental occurrence), and comes in a much more convenient and durable size (think field-guide size). The first 90 or so pages include overviews of a variety of topics including classification, biology, echolocation, foraging, summer and winter habitats, hibernation, migration, reproduction and longevity, bats as food (and bombs), attracting and controlling bats, diseases, current concerns (e.g., wind power, white-nose syndrome), conservation, and status. There also are short discussions of research techniques such as inventories, thermal imaging, nets and traps, bat banding (for more information on the government bat-banding program see Ellison 2008), radiotelem-etry, and acoustic identifications. The preceding booklet covered perhaps half of these topics and not nearly so completely as is done here. These sections are amply illustrated with photographs by the authors and colleagues.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1480.124

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of MammalogySame topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207