MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2411471645

The status of the Eastern Phoebe ( Sayornis phoebe ) in Cuba

2016· article· en· W2411471645 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kenneth G.D. Burrell, Lillian A. Knopf

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Caribbean Ornithology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyHumanitiesArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Eastern Phoebe ( Sayornis phoebe ) is a common migrant that breeds in Canada and the USA and winters throughout the southeastern USA and northern Mexico. Apart from the Bahamas, few records for this species exist in the Caribbean region. Currently, a total of eight records are known from Cuba, occurring principally during late fall, after the passage of strong cold fronts, during severe winters throughout the species’ core wintering range, or both. Sayornis phoebe es un migrante comun que nidifica en Canada y Estados Unidos e inverna a lo largo del sudeste de los Estados Unidos y el norte de Mexico. Aparte de en las Bahamas, existen pocos registros de esta especie en la region del Caribe. Actualmente, se conocen un total de ocho registros en Cuba, principalmente a finales del otono, luego del paso de los fuertes frentes frios, durante los severos inviernos a todo lo largo del nucleo del rango invernal de esta especie o en ambos momentos. La Moucherolle phebi ( Sayornis phoebe ) est un migrateur commun qui niche au Canada et aux Etats-Unis, et hiverne dans le sud-est des Etats-Unis et le nord du Mexique. Il existe peu de mentions de cette espece dans la Caraibe sauf aux Bahamas. Actuellement, l’espece a ete mentionnee huit fois a Cuba, principalement a la fin de l’automne apres le passage de forts fronts froids ou lors d'hivers rigoureux dans les principales zones d’hivernage de l’espece, ou au cours des deux periodes.

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)0.001
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Caribbean OrnithologySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207