MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4394350740 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.19249064

Yukon Winter Tick Monitoring: Government of Yukon cervid hide harvest submissions 2011 - 2020

2022· dataset· en· W4394350740 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Emily S. Chenery, Maud Henaff, Kristenn Magnusson, N. Jane Harms, Nicholas E. Mandrak, Péter K. Molnár

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)TickGeographyBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data associated with Chenery et al., 2022. Improving widescale monitoring of ectoparasite presence in northern Canadian wildlife with the aid of citizen science. See also ReadMe worksheet of dataset for full metadata. Records of harvested hides (animal skins) of moose, elk, caribou and mule deer from Yukon, Canada, submitted to the Government of Yukon between 2011-2020. Hides and hide samples were checked for presence of the winter tick, Dermacentor albipictus, using a hair transect method (described in Chenery et al., 2022) and the number of ticks present recorded, along with the harvest date, sex, species and locality of kill (game management subzone). Associated data relating to assessing hunter engagement with a citizen science program, the Yukon Winter Tick Monitoring Project (YWTMP) (2018-2020) are also included. These describe the level of conformity with YWTMP sample kit instructions (size of hide sample provided, information completed), and are discussed more fully in the associated manuscript.

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)0.006
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 score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.914

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.021

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicRangeland and Wildlife Management→French-language works237,207→