Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".