Bibliographic record
Abstract
This experiment took place throughout several days (October 13th, 14th, 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th in the year 2020), all the chosen locations were Ponds in Vaughan Ontario. The goal of this experiment was to observe the effect that Pest species have on the diversity and frequency of other birds in the same location (i.e, observable from staying in one spot). Behaviour, species,frequency and approximate distance from other species (in meters) were all factors taken into account. In suburban areas such as Vaughan, it is often seen to have a clear separation between pest species (most frequently Canadian Geese in this case) and other species. Therefore, this experiment used quantitative and qualitative values to determine how true this statement is. All observed values took place in the morning (between 8 A.M and 10 A.M) and the researcher spent 60 mins at each location. The weather varied from 5° C to 15° C and from clear skies (the 14th and 17th) cloud cover (13th, 18th and 19th) and occasionally rain (the 16th).
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.008 |
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".