MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214132012 · doi:10.5061/dryad.4qrfj6q96

Argos and GPS data for a polar bear track

2021· article· en· W3214132012 on OpenAlexaff
Marie Auger‐Méthé, Andrew E. Derocher

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpace Exploration and Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobal Positioning SystemTrack (disk drive)Remote sensingGeodesyComputer scienceGeographyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is rare to be able to validate state-space models for Argos data. This dataset provides a unique opportunity to do so, because it contains simultaneous Argos and GPS data for a polar bear. The GPS locations are extremely accurate (≤30 m) compared to Argos data, which can have errors as large as 36 km depending on the quality class. The dataset contains one year of movement data, starting on April 20, 2009. The dataset was used in the associated Ecological Monographs paper to show how to fit state-space models to ecological data.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.015

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicSpace Exploration and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207