Canada geese flight patterns in the vicinity of an aerodrome: Insights and management implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wildlife on and in the surroundings of an aerodrome pose a potential hazard for flight safety. Canada geese (Branta canadensis) represent a substantial risk for aircraft, due to their size and flocking behaviour. A group of 51 Canada geese were caught and neck-collared at two moult sites in the vicinity of Paris-Le Bourget airport. Six individuals were also GPS tagged. Bird movements were monitored between July 2019 and June 2021. The flight patterns and phenology, as well as the dispersion pattern of these birds, were investigated. Flights represented only about 1 per cent of geese daily activity. Geese spent most of their time on the ground in a 10km radius area around the capture sites. More than half of the flights outside the capture sites took place at the end of the day, between 6pm and 8pm. These flights were performed on average at less than 50m above the ground, and only less than 1 per cent of them crossed Paris-Le Bourget airport airspace. The finding of this study can be of interest to airport operators and regulators for the development of a management plan to help to reduce birdstrike risk to aircraft.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".