Habitat Evaluation Procedures Report; Carl Property - Yakama Nation.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A baseline habitat evaluation procedures (HEP) analysis was conducted on the Carl property (160 acres) in June 2007 to determine the number of habitat units to credit Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) for providing funds to acquire the property as partial mitigation for habitat losses associated with construction of McNary Dam. HEP surveys also helped assess the general ecological condition of the property. The Carl property appeared damaged from livestock grazing and exhibited a high percentage of invasive forbs. Exotic grasses, while present, did not comprise a large percentage of the available cover in most areas. Cover types were primarily grassland/shrubsteppe with a limited emergent vegetation component. Baseline HEP surveys generated 356.11 HUs or 2.2 HUs per acre. Habitat units were associated with the following HEP models: California quail (47.69 HUs), western meadowlark (114.78 HUs), mallard (131.93 HUs), Canada goose (60.34 HUs), and mink (1.38 HUs).
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.056 | 0.029 |
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".