MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230550263 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp.9435

18. Controlling Purple Loosestrife Populations in the Kingston and Surrounding Areas

2018· article· en· W4230550263 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Keenan Randall, Ty Greene, Melissa Lee, Carlyn McNabb

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBiological Control of Invasive Species
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInvasive speciesIntroduced speciesWildlifeNative plantBiologyWeed controlEcologyWeedPlant communityAgricultureGovernment (linguistics)GeographyAgroforestryEnvironmental planning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) is an invasive plant species that has affected agriculture and wildlife across Canada. The weed is not native to Canada; however in municipalities like Kingston and the surrounding area, it has caused tangible problems. We will strive to engage a government partner (City of Kingston), community organization (ON Invasive Species Awareness Program), and a local resident throughout the completion of our research and regarding the viability of solutions proposed. First, we will examine the origins of the plant in Canada, emphasizing the reproductive characteristics that make the purple loosestrife a powerfully invasive species. Next, we will analyze the impact of the purple loosestrife from three perspectives: (1) the impact on native plant communities; (2) the impact on native animal communities; (3) the impact on human life. We will then evaluate current bio management controls, as utilized by other governments, such as the introduction of another foreign species as a control agent. Specifically, we will examine the potential control systems using the following criteria: (1) ability to control the invasive species; (2) feasibility and cost; and (3) direct and indirect negative impacts. Finally, we will propose a comprehensive strategy for each organization moving forward, allowing for increased community collaboration and, ideally, the elimination and/or control of the invasive species.

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)0.001
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 score0.405
Threshold uncertainty score0.814

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.273
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.107 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicBiological Control of Invasive SpeciesFrench-language works237,207