Bibliographic record
Abstract
I n his classic book The Wind and the Caribou (1953), Erik Munsterhjelm quotes an ancient Dene saying, "No one knows the way of the winds and the caribou" (p.97).Barren-ground caribou, one of the most important wildlife species of the North American Subarctic and Arctic, travel in very large numbers when they come, but they are unpredictable.Ancient hunters must have perceived caribou as undepletable but, alas, also as impossible to foretell.The failure of caribou migrations and the starvation of the Inuit people that followed have been embedded in Canadian culture through Farley Mowat's People of the Deer (1952).Even though the veracity of Mowat's particular story has been questioned, this does not make the hardship caused by the disappearance of caribou any less real.Starvation is no longer common, but the phenomenon of disappearing caribou is still with us.There was one caribou crisis in the 1970s, and we seem to be in the middle of another one at the time of the publication of this book.Is the crisis real?Has there really been a sharp decline of the various populations?How can the observed changes be explained?As this book shows, these questions are almost as perplexing to current-day hunters, managers, and scientists as they were to the ancient hunters.This is not to say that we have made no progress over the decades to understand caribou population phenomena.Rather, our present understanding reveals a great deal of complexity that compels us to abandon the easy solutions offered by the universalistic frameworks of centralized resource management.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.694 | 0.680 |
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".