Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conservation efforts for the prairie rattlesnake ( Crotalus viridus viridus) in Lethbridge were initiated in 2000 and continued through 2003.The focus has been on educating the public to reduce human/snake conflicts and on the capture and moving of problem and vulnerable rattlesnakes to more secure habitat.During the summer of 2003, twenty-three rattlesnakes were captured and moved to the Cottonwood Park hibemaculum and another was captured and moved to Popson Park.Passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags were implanted in the captured rattlesnakes for long-term identification and monitoring.Telemetry transmitters were attached externally to the rattles of eight rattlesnakes prior to their release.Subsequently, rattlesnake dispersal, movements, and habitat use were monitored using radio telemetry.Due to problems with the radio transmitters staying attached, a very limited amount of movement data was collected.Data collected was used to test the hypothesis that if rattlesnakes hibernate successfully at the artificial hibemaculum in Cottonwood Park, they will adopt Cottonwood Park as their home range and return in subsequent years to hibernate.Results indicated that 3 of the 8 rattlesnakes released from the Cottonwood Park hibemaculum in spring 2003 returned to the enclosure in the fall.This was similar to results of 2002.Continued efforts to provide public education, respond quickly to calls for problem rattlesnake removal, and to maintain the participation and cooperation of all interested groups and citizens will be necessary for conserving a prairie rattlesnake population in Lethbridge.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.075 | 0.030 |
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".