MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391900485 · doi:10.53555/sfs.v11i2.2111

Leopard Intrusion Into Human Settlements: A Study Of Conflict In Margalla Hills National Park

2024· article· en· W4391900485 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Safwan Daud, Mamoona Wali Muhammad, Najeeb Ullah Khan, M Abdul Malik, Arz Muhammad Umrani, Nowsherwan Zarif, Muhammad Sajawal, Gohar Ali, Asif Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeopardHuman settlementNational parkGeographyIntrusionArchaeologyGeologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The leopard is one of the most common apex predators having recurrent conflict with humans throughout the world. This study investigates the dynamics and potential mitigation of human-leopard conflict in communities bordering Margalla Hills National Park, Pakistan, where livestock depredation drives conflict. A questionnaire survey of 174 residents provided data on depredation patterns, risk perceptions, attitudes towards leopards, and perspectives on solutions. Key findings show uneven distribution of attacks by location and livestock type due to husbandry practices and land use. Small farms, carelessness, and sole dependence on vulnerable livestock enable persistent conflict. The majority of respondents (57.71%) said leopards were rare, while 32% said they were common. The predominant perception of leopards as very or slightly dangerous reveals a high level of fear and risk awareness. The most common response was positive, with 89 respondents viewing leopards favorably. A high prevalence of goats in Saidpur village in comparison to other rural settings explains the recurrent depredation and resultant increased human-leopard conflict. Community attitudes toward leopards are diverse, signaling opportunities for constructive engagement through research, education, and inclusive policy development. With careful persistence over time, communities may eventually find an equitable path towards coexistence that preserves Islamabad iconic leopards while also meeting local priorities.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Survey in Fisheries SciencesSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207