MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318829419 · doi:10.15788/ndot2022.2

Best Practices Manual to Reduce Animal-Vehicle Collisions and Provide Habitat Connectivity for Wildlife

2022· report· en· W4318829419 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Marcel P. Huijser, E.R. Fairbank, K.S. Paul

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOregon Department of TransportationIowa Department of TransportationNevada Department of TransportationArizona Department of TransportationNew Mexico Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationParks CanadaCalifornia Department of TransportationMinnesota Department of TransportationAlaska Department of Transportation and Public FacilitiesMichigan Department of TransportationU.S. Department of Transportation
KeywordsWildlifeHabitatCullingAnimal speciesMammalLivestockRoamingWildlife conservationRelocationWildlife corridorGeographyEcologyBiologyComputer scienceZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal for this manual is to provide practical information for the implementation of mitigation measures that aim to: 1. Improve human safety through reducing collisions with large animals, including large wild mammal species, select free roaming large feral species, and select free roaming large livestock species, and 2. Improve or maintain habitat connectivity for terrestrial wildlife species and selected feral species through safe crossing opportunities. This manual does not include all possible measures that can or may reduce animal-vehicle collisions and maintain or improve habitat connectivity for wildlife. The measures included in this manual are: Barriers (fences) in combination with crossing structures (for large wild mammals and for small wild animal species), roadside animal detection system, Barriers (fences), Barriers (fences) in combination with crossing structures (for free roaming livestock), and culling, relocation, anti-fertility treatment, roadside animal detection systems, barriers (fences), and barriers (fences) in combination with crossing structures (for large feral mammal species such as feral horses and burros).

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1490.081

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWildlife-Road Interactions and ConservationFrench-language works237,207