Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the rapid advancements in the field of road ecology, very little research has been done in railway ecology. Basic research, such as railway use by wildlife, is relatively undocumented, albeit very important in understanding the potential negative and positive effects of railways on wildlife and ecosystems. We provide one of the first studies documenting wildlife railway use using motion-triggered cameras along a 20 km stretch of railway in Ontario. Our objectives were to develop a much-needed baseline understanding of railway use by endemic wildlife species, investigate differences in frequency of use among species, compare diurnal versus nocturnal use, and determine if railway use by wildlife was uniform or spatially varied. We found a significant proportion of medium-to-large resident mammalian fauna and several avian species non-uniformly using the studied railway. Some species used the railway as a travel corridor, while others appeared to use it incidentally. Diel and seasonal patterns of use were apparent for many species. Our findings emphasize the importance of species-specific investigations of railway ecology. The collection of baseline information on railway use by wildlife is critical in view of the dearth of available data, and we highly encourage further research in all aspects of wildlife–railway ecology.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 it