MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126471349 · doi:10.1111/mam.12241

Runway roadkill: a global review of mammal strikes with aircraft

2021· review· en· W3126471349 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMammal Review · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Air ForceIrish Research CouncilTransport Canada
KeywordsMammalWildlifeRunwayGeographyMarine mammalAviationHumEcologyBiologyArchaeologyHistoryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The number of reported collisions (i.e. strikes) between aircraft and wildlife is increasing globally, with consequences for personnel and passenger safety as well as for industry economics. These are important considerations for airport operators that are obliged to mitigate wildlife hazards at airfields. Incidents involving mammals account for approximately 3–10% of all recorded strikes. However, relatively little research has been conducted on mammal strikes with aircraft outside of the USA. We collate mammal strike data from six major national aviation authorities and a global aircraft database and review the available scientific and grey literature. We aim to identify which mammal families are involved in strike events and how widespread the issue is on a global scale. We also aim to demonstrate the importance of consistently recording strike instances in national databases. We identified 40 families that were involved in strike events in 47 countries. Reported mammal strike events have been increasing by up to 68% annually. Chiroptera (4 families) accounted for the greatest proportion of strikes in Australia; leporids and canids in Canada, Germany and the UK; and Chiroptera (5 families) and cervids in the USA. More mammals were struck during the landing phase of an aircraft's rotation than any other phase. Circa‐diel strike risk was greatest at dusk and circa‐annum strike risk was greatest during late summer, with some international variation. The total estimated cost of damage resulting from reported mammal strikes exceeded US$103 million in the USA alone, over 30 years. Mammal strikes represent a substantial risk in airfield environments. Monitoring of existing wild mammal populations is required to understand temporal trends in presence, abundance, and activity patterns and to inform management decisions. Increased and accurate reporting of strike events globally is needed to inform Wildlife Hazard Management Plans and support effective strike mitigation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.286 · 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