Reactions of ground-nesting marine birds to human disturbance in the Canadian Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I studied the reactions of five ground-nesting marine bird species (Arctic tern (Sterna paradisaea), Sabine’s gull (Xema sabini), common eider (Somateria mollissima), long-tailed duck (Clangula hyemalis), and Ross’ gull (Rhodostethia rosea)) breeding in the low and high Arctic to disturbance from nearby aircraft as well as avian flight initiation response to humans approaching on foot. All species except nesting long-tailed ducks and common eiders departed their nest when overhead aircraft were within 200 m, with loafing birds often flying off when aircraft were still 1 km away. There was considerable individual and species-specific variation in responses to approaching humans, with some nesting birds not flushing from their nest until touched by a researcher (e.g., waterfowl, 0 m), while others flushed when people were 400 m away (Ross’s gull). Excluding Ross’s gulls, 95% of the individuals of most species did not initiate flight until humans were ≤100 m from the nest, suggesting that this might represent a minimum, suitable “buffer zone” around nesting colonies for nonmotorized human activities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".