Bibliographic record
Abstract
The diversity of landscapes and habitats in the park (see the following images) supports a wide variety of plant and animal species.Many species found here are typical of those known from the Canadian Shield region of northern Alberta.Others are poorly understood in terms of their presence, numbers and distribution.This is the case for the spider fauna of the area.■ Colin Lake shoreline Woodman Creel< 3. Methods Pond near Esker Lake Esker Lake (ridge on NE backslnore) Regenerating burn area 3.1 Survey Dates: Field surveys to document the biophysical features of Colin-Cornwall Lakes Wildland Provincial Park were conducted during the spring and summer of 2002 by staff of the Parks and Protected Areas Division and a multi-disciplinary team of volunteers.The park was visited from 6-14 June and 5-10 July 2002 (both inclusive).Spiders were one component of the survey and were collected during those time periods. Collection of Spiders:Spiders were collected from a wide variety of habitats in the park using a variety of methods, ranging from random hand-picking to a series of pit and pan traps (Finnamore et al. 2001).Some spiders were obtained from the Malaise and UV traps that were used by other researchers to collect moths and other insects.Spiders were also collected by sweep-netting vegetation.All specimens were preserved in 95% ethanol.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".