MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3032264184 · doi:10.29173/bluejay5967

Breeding status and notes on diet of the northern saw-whet owl at Delta Marsh, Manitoba

2002· article· en· W3032264184 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Todd J. Underwood, Spencer G. Sealy

Bibliographic record

VenueBlue Jay · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarshDeltaGeographyMississippi deltaArchaeologyBiologyEcologyWetlandEnvironmental scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Northern Saw-whet Owls breed in forests throughout southern Canada, northern and western United States, and some mountainous areas of Mexico.6 At Delta Marsh, Manitoba, saw-whet owls have been considered rare to uncommon from spring through fall.8 13 Recently, a mist-netting program run by the Delta Marsh Bird Observatory has shown them to be common fall migrants.10 We present observations that confirm breeding of saw-whet owls at Delta Marsh and identify prey items taken from pellets collected at a single roost site.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.532
Threshold uncertainty score0.930

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlue JaySame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207