MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2246010455 · doi:10.2981/wlb.2000.027

Status and management of the greater prairie‐chicken <i>Tympanuchus cupido pinnatus</i> in North America

2000· article· en· W2246010455 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
W. Daniel Svedarsky, Ronald L. Westemeier, Robert J. Robel, Sharron Gough, John E. Toepher

Bibliographic record

VenueWildlife Biology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Education, IndiaUniversity of Minnesota
KeywordsGeographyGrouseGrasslandRange (aeronautics)Conservation Reserve ProgramHabitatPopulationLand coverEcologyAgroforestryLand useAgricultureDemographyEnvironmental scienceBiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Greater prairie‐chickens Tympanuchus cupido pinnatus are grouse of the tallgrass prairie of North America. Their range expanded greatly following the spread of early European agriculture into the grasslands and logging in forested areas. When the optimum mix of cropland and grass was exceeded, their range generally contracted to the regions where climatic and/or soil factors favoured the retention of grassland. Historically they probably occurred in 20 states of the United States and four Canadian provinces, but presently they only occur in 11 states and no longer in Canada. Their current status throughout the range varies considerably depending on habitat conditions, population levels, management capabilities and local land‐use economic factors. A variety of conservation efforts, including translocation, are underway in the states where they occur, the intensity of which is generally inverse to numbers remaining. Noteworthy, is the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) which has increased grassland cover on private land through incentive payments.

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 score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.547

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations57
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWildlife BiologySame topicRangeland and Wildlife ManagementFrench-language works237,207