MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2781896179 · doi:10.14288/1.0362863

Spatiotemporal patterns and reliability of bobcat and Canada lynx occurrence records in British Columbia

2018· article· en· W2781896179 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
TJ Gooliaff

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyReliability (semiconductor)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the distribution of a species is imperative for proper management and conservation to occur, especially in the wake of climate change and other biotic and abiotic changes that are currently occurring across the globe. Numerous species are shifting their ranges in response to these changes; tracking these shifts is the first step in conserving current and future habitats. Provincial or state-wide records, as well as citizen science, can be used to estimate broad-scale distributions, whereas camera trapping has become a common tool for detecting species at smaller scales. However, cryptic and elusive species such as mesocarnivores are difficult to monitor. Here, I use bobcats (Lynx rufus) and Canada lynx (L. canadensis) in British Columbia, Canada, as a case study to examine the data sources available for mapping mesocarnivore distributions, use those data to assess whether bobcat and lynx distributions have undergone any shifts over the past century, and determine whether these very similar-looking species can be reliably identified from camera images. I estimated the distributions of bobcats and lynx in BC using five independent data sources. Trapping records, hunting records, vehicle-kill records, trapper surveys that I distributed, and images that I solicited from the public all indicated that bobcats were restricted to southern BC, whereas lynx occurred throughout most of the interior of the province. I used trapping records and trapper surveys to determine whether bobcats or lynx have shifted their range in BC; these data suggest that distributions have remained stable over the past century. Lastly, I measured agreement among experts in classifying images of bobcats and lynx, and revealed that even experts find it difficult to distinguish between bobcats and lynx from camera images; agreement among experts in their classifications of the images was poor, and experts were inconsistent when asked to reclassify images weeks later.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.163 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change→French-language works237,207→