MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401211088 · doi:10.15788/1720809659

The effectiveness of electrified barriers to keep large mammals out of a fenced road corridor and a campground

2024· report· en· W4401211088 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Marcel P. Huijser

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOregon Department of TransportationIowa Department of TransportationNevada Department of TransportationNew Mexico Department of TransportationParks CanadaCalifornia Department of TransportationMinnesota Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationAlaska Department of Transportation and Public FacilitiesMichigan Department of TransportationU.S. Department of Transportation
KeywordsTransport engineeringGeographyComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For this project the researchers investigated the effectiveness of electrified barriers designed to keep large mammals out of a fenced road corridor (Trans-Canada Highway through Banff and Yoho National Park) and a campground (Lake Louise Campground, Banff National Park). The barriers were designed for large ungulates (e.g. white-tailed deer, mule deer, elk, moose) and large mammal species with paws (e.g. black bear, grizzly bear). The barriers consisted of steel pipes that were partially electrified. None of the white-tailed deer, mule deer, elk, moose, black bears, grizzly bears, red foxes, and coyotes that were observed on the habitat side of the barriers crossed the electrified barriers into the fenced road corridor or the campground. A black bear attempting to exit the fenced road corridor failed to cross to the habitat side of the electrified barrier. Two red foxes and one wolverine did appear to exit the fenced road corridor to the habitat side of the electrified barrier, but these three crossings were all in winter when the voltage was likely compromised because of snow and road salt. In addition, crossings to the habitat side can be considered acceptable as they improve human safety on the main highway and keep the animals from being hit by vehicles. We conclude that, although sample sizes were limited, the electrified barriers (when voltage was adequate and when not filled with snow) were 100% effective in keeping both large ungulates and large species with paws out of a fenced road corridor and a campground.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies→French-language works237,207→