Bibliographic record
Abstract
Here we describe the standardised protocol used by the Canadian Airborne Biodiversity Observatory (CABO) to survey open vegetation (i.e., vegetation without tree cover) at the Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve (British Columbia), Mer Bleue Bog (Ontario) and Parc national des Îles-de-Boucherville (Québec) sites. Surveys were conducted in 3x3m square plots, with each plot containing nine 1x1m subplots. Plot locations were selected in order to capture a range of environmental conditions of interest (e.g., distance from forest, soil types, or microtopography). All data were entered via the Fulcrum application, using the Plots, Subplots, and Vegetation Surveys: Herbs and Shrubs apps. For each plot, we first verified plot orientation (two edges of the square north-south, two east-west), measured geographic coordinates of the plot center and corners, and estimated slope angle and aspect. All plant species within the plot were identified. For each subplot, we made visual estimates of percent cover of all plant species present, as well as leaf litter and bare ground. If a drone was available, percent cover estimates were not made in the field; rather, overhead photographs taken with the drone were first annotated and later analyzed quantitatively using virtual point frames to obtain data on the abundance and distribution of plant species within the plots. The ground-based plant surveys were conducted in order to be paired with remotely-sensed aerial hyperspectral imagery.
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 | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.320 | 0.130 |
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".