Preparation of regional shorebird monitoring plans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shorebird monitoring programs in Canada and the United States are being developed under the auspices of PRISM, the Program for Regional and International Shorebird Monitoring. PRISM provides a single blueprint for implementing the monitoring proposals in the shorebird conservation plans prepared recently in Canada and the United States. It includes four segments: arctic and boreal breeding surveys, temperate breeding surveys, temperate nonbreeding surveys, and neotropical surveys. A separate document, available at http://amap.wr.usgs.gov, provides an overview of PRISM. Temperate non-breeding surveys have the potential to contribute to four of the five goals of PRISM: monitor stopover sites during the spring and fall migration, elucidate habitat relationships, help local managers meet shorebird conservation goals, and measure population trends. This program seeks to standardize site selection, data collection, and data storage among existing initiatives including the International Shorebird Survey, Maritimes Shorebird Survey, and Western Shorebird Survey. The temperate non-breeding surveys involve a major effort to identify shorebird concentration sites and develop ways to survey them for shorebirds. These analyses are termed “regional assessments” and are being conducted throughout southern Canada and the United States. This document provides guidelines for preparing regional assessments. It is intended for people who will use the shorebird survey data, so they can understand the sampling plans used to select sites, and for other waterbird specialists who may be interested in adapting the approach for their species. More detailed procedures and examples are available at http://amap.wr.usgs.gov.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.059 | 0.017 |
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".