MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Raptors and Scavengers

2001· book-chapter· en· W4388360820 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Frank I. Doyle, James N. Smith

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsButeoBuboGeographyPredationAbundance (ecology)Snowshoe hareEcologyPopulationTemperate climateBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The principal study to date of the responses of raptorial birds to the snowshoe hare cycle was conducted by Lloyd Keith and colleagues in a mixed farmland/ aspen parkland landscape at Rochester, Alberta. They found that great homed owls (Bubo virginianus) showed strong reproductive and numerical responses to hare abundance (Mclnvaille and Keith 1974, Adamcik et al. 1978). In contrast, red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) numbers at Rochester remained stable, even though their reproductive success declined as hares disappeared from the prey base (Adamcik et al. 1979). In Alaska, numbers and breeding success of northern goshawks responded positively to increasing hare abundance (McGowan 1975). Also in Alaska, golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) reproduced more successfully during a period of high hare and ptarmigan abundance (McIntyre and Adams 1999). The community and population level responses of other raptors to vole cycles have been studied intensively in Europe (e.g., Korpimaki and Norrdahl 1991) and less intensively in temperate North America (e.g., Phelan and Robertson 1978).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.007

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies→French-language works237,207→