MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320105335 · doi:10.1644/jmammal/92-2-478

Vaughan, T. A., J. M. Ryan, and N. J. Czaplewski. 2011. MAMMALOGY. 5th ed. Jones and Bartlett Publishers, Sudbury, Massachusetts, 750 pp. ISBN 978-0-7637-6299-5, price (paper), $100.00

2011· article· en· W2320105335 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
P. W. Freeman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mammalogy · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCLARITYSubject (documents)Environmental ethicsHistoryLibrary scienceArt historyClassicsPhilosophyBiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Last summer I spent time with old friends. Terry Vaughan and company have significantly updated their text, Mammalogy, for the 5th edition (2011). The book is 62% larger than the 1st edition in 1972 (Vaughan 1972). Vaughan, Ryan, and Czaplewski skewer topics with a simplicity derived from years of mammalian research and teaching, and it is a pure pleasure to read. The synthetic nature of Mammalogy (2011) and exceptional clarity in writing make this edition an ideal book that is not just for class. Because much new research has been integrated into each chapter, all mammalogists will appreciate new introductions to each group and newly synthesized classification, ecology, physiology, and other subject-driven chapters. I found myself picking up the book where I had left off and treating it more like a novel than a text. Further, I kept interrupting myself and wandering to other topics (what's going on these days with primates, or the latest in bats, or the latest in whale evolution). It was a rich, rewarding summer.

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)0.003
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 score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1110.080

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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