MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285552656 · doi:10.14351/0831-4985-35.1.21

Operation Bone Rescue—A Case Study of Remediating Flood Damage to Mammal Specimens

2021· article· en· W4285552656 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Erin K. Kuprewicz, Frank M.S. Muzio, Greyson Nackid

Bibliographic record

VenueCollection Forum · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlood mythNatural disasterBiodiversityEnvironmental planningArchaeologyEnvironmental scienceHistoryEcologyGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Water damage to natural history collections can result from both natural and human-caused environmental disasters. Floods can result in irreparable damage to scientific specimens, depending on the scale of the disaster, types of specimens affected, and availability of remediation resources. In April 2021, the mammal skeletal collection in the Biodiversity Research Collections (BRC) of the University of Connecticut (UConn) experienced a ceiling flood that affected 612 specimens. In this paper we detail all steps of our specimen rescue process and all materials and equipment we used to complete this remediation in an endeavor we termed “Operation Bone Rescue.” Because we were able to immediately respond to this emergency and implement a complete remediation plan, facilitated by funding from our university, we not only rescued all water-affected specimens, but also improved specimen storage and metadata. We highlight the holistic nature of this successful operation and the key roles played by personnel in the BRC, UConn Facilities Operations, Fire Department, and College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Dean's Office. A deep appreciation of the value of natural history collections is shared widely on our campus and resulted in the favorable outcomes of this complex, coordinated specimen rescue effort.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.265
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designCase report
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCollection ForumSame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207