18. A Risk Assessment of Wind Farming On Amherst Island
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amherst Island is an internationally renowned sanctuary for raptors and is home to 34 avian species at risk. In addition to providing critical habitat for migrating birds, Amherst Island also supports a variety of other taxa including reptiles, amphibians, bats, and butterflies, some of which are endangered. Located in eastern Ontario, the island has been ranked second in biodiversity significance by Islands of Life and has been internationally recognized as an Important Bird Area. Amherst Island gained attention in recent months following a proposal by Windlectric Inc. to install and operate up to 36 wind turbines on Amherst Island as part of the Government of Ontario’s renewable energy initiatives. Despite clear energy and economic benefits, negative impacts of wind turbine installation have also been well documented. Risks associated with wind farming include habitat fragmentation and destruction, increased road traffic, and bird and bat strikes.With the help of contacts at the Association to Protect Amherst Island, Kingston Field Naturalists, and Windlectric Inc., we plan to develop an unbiased risk assessment using data from primary literature and existing wind farms as case studies. We will place special focus on species of concern while weighing potential environmental disturbance against benefits of the green energy movement in Ontario. Our project is intended to act as a holistic, nonpartisan assessment of the benefits and potential concerns involved with the wind turbine project, and where appropriate, we hope to provide recommendations for mitigating damages associated with installation and operation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".