Pacific Flyway management plan for Pacific brant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
the pacific flyway brant branta bernicla population pfbp is made up of brant breeding in alaska the western canadian arctic and the eastern russian arctic and wintering primarily along the pacific coast from alaska to mexico figure 1 in 1978 the pacific flyway council implemented the first pacific brant management plan the plan was revised in 1981 and 1992 the pfbp breeds in alaska canada and russia appendix a and is subdivided into two management units black brant predominate breeding primarily in alaska the low arctic of western canada and northeastern russia palmer 1976 banikov et al 1983 western high arctic wha brant breed on the parry islands in northwest territories and exhibit plumage characteristics ranging from the light gray breast and belly feathers of atlantic brant to the black breast and belly feathers of black brant boyd and maltby 1979 most of the wha population is composed of the lighter and intermediate plumage types the wha population is currently distinguished from other north american brant populations boyd and maltby 1979 boyd and maltby 1980 boyd et al 1988 reed et al 1989a reed et al 1998 genetic comparisons suggest the population may be reproductively isolated from black brant and atlantic brant and comprise a separate stock with no subspecies designation shields 1990 this plan recognizes the separate status of wha brant for management purposes it is recognized that the pfbp is a resource shared among the people of the united states canada mexico russia and japan as such a cooperative effort has been and will continue to be required for sound management
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.058 | 0.012 |
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".