The Cuban Treefrog in Florida: Life History of a Successful Colonizing Species, by Walter E. Meshaka, Jr. [Review]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
a mark I showed a visitor even in poor light this winter.The shapes of birds are particularly accurate.The only one I thought was too stocky was the shouldbe-sleek Black-browed Albatross.The Great Grey Owl shows a streaked breast with no horizontal barring.This is the Strix nebulosa lapponica race that will have a pale appearance to North Americans.The back of the Hawk Owl has large pale patches which mark as the nominate race Surnia ulula ulula and this will also look a little odd to North Americans.A few of the extreme rarities and introduced species are not illustrated.The author's choice of English names is a bit confusing.They start by using Red-throated Loon not Diver, but go to Great Northern -not Common -Loon.They add such words as (Common) in parentheses in front of Raven, but also in front of (Blackbilled) Magpie.Hoary Redpoll is called an Arctic and White-winged Crossbill is a Two-barred.The scientific names are, of course, consistent.Overall, this is an excellent book not only for Europeans but for North Americans too.Many birds from North America are covered and covered well.For example, there is good information on separating Grey-cheeked and Swainson's thrush.As well, of course, there are numerous European species that occur here, such as Fieldfare, that get detailed treatment.It is a fine reference for all those species the two continents have in common.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".