MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2257973089 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.749689.v1

Results of a bait trial testing predation in four vertical strata

2013· article· en· W2257973089 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Buddle Chris, Kathleen Aikens

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredationGeologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data from a 2007 field study in the Morgan Arboretum, Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, Québec. Associated with a published paper (https://peerj.com/articles/138/). This is a data file of 9 columns and 168 rows. Column information is as follows: Tree = tree identity, 21 mature sugar maples were used Stratum = vertical stratum of the branch used for the trial, including: UN - understory; LC = lower canopy; MC - mid canopy; UC - upper canopy Note that five mealworm baits were pinned to the branch in each stratum, and that baits were checked a total of four times over 150 minutes. The first observation was recorded after 60 minutes, and each successive observation was taken 30 minutes after the previous one. Baits were also checked after an overnight period. totpred = number of mealworm baits that were predated during the four observation periods notpred = number of mealworm baits not predated during the four observation periods t.1st = time (in number of observation periods) till first observed predation on a bait on that branch maxpred = maximum number of predators observed during one observation period on that branch p.rmvd = proportion of baits removed after overnight period rmvd = number of baits removed after overnight period left = number of baits left after overnight period

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.085
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and Behavior→French-language works237,207→