MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785849211 · doi:10.4000/books.pum.8085

Y a-t-il des cougars au Québec ?

2014· book-chapter· fr· W2785849211 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mathieu-Robert Sauvé

Bibliographic record

VenuePresses de l’Université de Montréal eBooks · 2014
Typebook-chapter
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRabbits: Nutrition, Reproduction, Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Des centaines de personnes le croient et, chaque année, le ministère des Ressources naturelles, de la Faune et des Parcs recueille des témoignages de gens qui affirment en avoir aperçu dans les forêts du nord et de l’est de la province. Toutefois, les preuves incontestables manquent toujours à l’appel depuis qu’un chasseur a abattu un de ces grands félins près de la frontière américaine en 1938. Trois mortalités ont aussi été rapportées : un mâle a été tué par arme à feu au printemps 1992 ; u...

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.003

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePresses de l’Université de Montréal eBooksSame topicRabbits: Nutrition, Reproduction, HealthFrench-language works237,207