MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2923733225 · doi:10.1139/as-2018-0031

Unusual late July observation of a fledgling Lapland longspur in low Arctic Greenland following the cool spring of 2018

2019· article· en· W2923733225 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Eric Post, Eva Beyen, Pernille Sporon Bøving, R. Conor Higgins, Christian John, Jeffrey T. Kerby, Christian Pedersen, David A. Watts

Bibliographic record

VenueArctic Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCornell Lab of OrnithologyNational Geographic SocietyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsArcticSpring (device)Nest (protein structural motif)GeographyPhysical geographyClimatologyEcologyOceanographyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report an observation of a flightless fledgling Lapland longspur (Calcarius lapponicus (Linnaeus, 1758)) at a long-term study site near Kangerlussuaq, Greenland, in late July 2018. Based on our observations of longspur nests at the site dating back to 1993, we estimate that the fledgling observed in 2018 may have originated from a nest initiated 12–37 d later than nesting in previous years. Onset of spring in 2018 was late, but comparable with other years in which longspur nests were observed a full calendar month earlier than in 2018. An analysis including multiple candidate predictor variables revealed a strong negative association between estimated longspur nest initiation dates and mean May temperature, as well as a weaker association with the length of the annual period of vegetation green up at the site. Given the limitations of our data, however, we are unable to assign causality to the 2018 observation, and cannot rule out other possibilities, such as that it may have resulted from a second clutch.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.222 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArctic ScienceSame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207