MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993738583 · doi:10.1111/csp2.149

A decision framework to identify populations that are most vulnerable to the population level effects of disturbance

2019· article· en· W2993738583 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Science and Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsSpinal Cord Injury BC
FundersOffice of Naval Research
KeywordsDisturbance (geology)PopulationEcologyWorkflowEnvironmental resource managementPopulation sizeBiologyGeographyComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental healthMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a decision framework to identify when detailed population‐level assessments are required to understand the potential impacts of a disturbance‐inducing activity on a marine mammal population and discuss how the framework can be applied to other taxa. Species at high risk of population‐level effects can be identified using information on the number of individuals that are likely to be disturbed by the activity, total population size, the probability of repeated disturbance, the species' reproductive strategy, and the life stages (e.g., feeding, pregnant, and lactating) of the individuals most likely to be exposed. This hierarchical approach provides those responsible for conducting impact assessments with a time‐efficient, cost‐effective and reproducible workflow that allows them to prioritize their efforts and assign funds to those species with the most pressing conservation needs. A fully worked case study using marine mammals in the vicinity of a naval training activity is supplied.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.288 · 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