MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312089244 · doi:10.7717/peerj.14604

Opening the black box of bird-window collisions: passive video recordings in a residential backyard

2022· article· en· W4312089244 on OpenAlexaff
Brendon Samuels, M. Brock Fenton, Esteban Fernández‐Juricic, Scott A. MacDougall‐Shackleton

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollisionWindow (computing)Range (aeronautics)GeographyDemographyPhysical geographyEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceComputer securityEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Collisions with windows on buildings are a major source of bird mortality. The current understanding of daytime collisions is limited by a lack of empirical data on how collisions occur in the real world because most data are collected by recording evidence of mortality rather than pre-collision behaviour. Based on published literature suggesting a causal relationship between bird collision risk and the appearance of reflections on glass, the fact that reflections vary in appearance depending on viewing angle, and general principles of object collision kinematics, we hypothesized that the risk and lethality of window collisions may be related to the angle and velocity of birds' flight. We deployed a home security camera system to passively record interactions between common North American bird species and residential windows in a backyard setting over spring, summer and fall seasons over 2 years. We captured 38 events including 29 collisions and nine near-misses in which birds approached the glass but avoided impact. Only two of the collisions resulted in immediate fatality, while 23 birds flew away immediately following impact. Birds approached the glass at variable flight speeds and from a wide range of angles, suggesting that the dynamic appearance of reflections on glass at different times of day may play a causal role in collision risk. Birds that approached the window at higher velocity were more likely to be immediately killed or stunned. Most collisions were not detected by the building occupants and, given that most birds flew away immediately, carcass surveys would only document a small fraction of window collisions. We discuss the implications of characterizing pre-collision behaviour for designing effective collision prevention methods.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207