MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394195352 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.3846768

BIOL2050 Lab 2, Dataset 1: Measuring the Abundance of Different Plant Species in York University Grassland Using Quadrats

2016· dataset· en· W4394195352 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lauren Cunningham

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2016
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany and Plant Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuadratGrasslandAbundance (ecology)Plant speciesEcologyGeographyEnvironmental scienceForestryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Variables "Total # of Plants"- A counted estimate as seen by the naked eye of the total abundance of plants within a quadrat. "Total # of Different Plant Species"- Counting the number of different plant species found within a quadrat after careful examination by the naked eye. "Total Cover of All Vegetation (%)"- Estimating the percentage of vegetation found within a quadrat (opposed to sparse areas of bare soil) as seen by the naked eye. "Total Cover of Grasses (%)"- Estimating the percentage of grass found within the quadrat (out of the percentage of vegetation already present), again using the naked eye. MethodThe dataset was collected on September 21, 2016 in a grassland area at York University (Keele Campus, Toronto). A square quadrat was used to measure the abundance and variety of plant species present within the grassland. After numbering the 4 sides of the quadrat, a random number generator was used to ensure random placement 25 times within the grassland. All measured variables were examined and estimated using the naked eye.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.029

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.120 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicBotany and Plant Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207