MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922069249 · doi:10.5070/v420110313

Radio-controlled models for bird dispersal

2002· article· en· W2922069249 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
B. Carter Nicholas

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings - Vertebrate Pest Conference · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlockBiological dispersalWildlifeGeographyEcologyFisheryEnvironmental scienceBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Border Collie Rescue (BCR), in cooperation with the Dover Air Force Base (AFB), conducted a series of field trials to test the efficacy of utilizing radio-controlled models (RCs) (aircraft and boats) in dispersing several species of birds from troublesome locations around the Dover AFB environment. Results of these trials suggest that RCs can be used to effectively harass gulls, black vultures, ducks, and geese from difficult areas, though there are a number of limitations and contraindications that must be taken into account when determining the value of instituting a harassment program utilizing RCs. Though use of border collies in its wildlife management program had eliminated the majority of bird hazards at Dover AFB, a few troublesome areas and species remained, particularly those birds that were located in areas inaccessible to the dog (e.g. large quarries with heavy machinery, soaring vultures). Radio-controlled aircraft were highly effective in dispersing large flocks of loafing gulls, black vultures soaring in thermals and passing through the airfield environment, as well as flocks of ducks and teal feeding and resting on open bodies of water. They were also partially effective at discouraging transitioning gulls and geese from utilizing the airspace over the base, as well dispersing gulls feeding on earthworms on runways and taxiways, though several environmental and operational variables determined success. Radio-controlled aircraft were entirely ineffective in dispersing Canada geese from open water. Coordinated effort with a radio-controlled boat, however, solved this limitation and proved to be an effective means of eliminating the Canada goose presence from large bodies of water.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.194 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings - Vertebrate Pest ConferenceSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207