Waterfowl Production and Habitat Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
the waterfowl production and habitat survey conducted by the u s fish and wildlife service became operational in 1955 in the canadian prairies strata 26 40 in the north central united states strata were phased in during 1958 strata 43 45 47 1959 strata 44 48 49 and 1966 strata 41 42 in canada s northwest territories and northern alberta strata 13 18 75 77 have been surveyed since 1966 the primary purpose of the survey was to provide information on duck production from the mid continent breeding areas these data were used in the past to forecast the annual fall flight of ducks present applications include research on habitat climate and waterfowl production relationships important in harvest regulation and habitat conservation since 2004 the usfws has not had the traditional waterfowl production and habitat survey to verify the early predictions of our biologists in the field the production survey was discontinued due to budget constraints within the migratory bird program and because modern analytical procedures reduced the utility of brood indices produced by the survey instead the usfws presents habitat conditions as recorded during the months of may and june at the time of the waterfowl breeding population and habitat survey within the waterfowl population status reports located on the following website http www fws gov birds surveys and data reports and publications population status php
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.026 |
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".