MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409081559 · doi:10.63172/391719vrsnhx

Disseminations which established Canada goose (Branta canadensis) throughout New Zealand

2015· article· en· W4409081559 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Murray Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueNotornis · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrantaGooseGeographyZoologyFisheryBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Of 4 importations of Canada goose Branta canadensis into New Zealand, 2 (in 1905, 1920) resulted in breeding. Commencing in 1907, multiple and repeated releases of the 1905 geese and their progeny had, by 1922, established flocks of several hundred distributed along the eastern Canterbury and Otago foothills of the Southern Alps. Thereafter, the geese spread widely but remained resident and breeding only in the South Island. Establishment of Canada geese in North Island commenced in 1969 with the first of 4 transfers by the Wildlife Service, collectively totalling 280 birds from Canterbury’s Lakes Ellesmere and Forsyth, to coastal Wairoa lakes and nearby locations. The Wildlife Service assisted numerous other transfer and release initiatives, of at least 800 birds, in North Island in the 1970s and 1980s, principally by Wellington and Auckland Acclimatisation Societies, Ducks Unlimited, and private waterfowl enthusiasts. At the same time it supported transfers of 450 geese to the South Island’s West Coast. From these multiple releases Canada geese have become widespread in rural New Zealand.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.608
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNotornisSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207