MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W611966160 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511606564

Ecology and Control of Introduced Plants

2003· book· en· W611966160 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2003
Typebook
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBiological Control of Invasive Species
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcologyInvasive speciesPlant communityScale (ratio)GeographyEnvironmental ethicsBiologyCartographySpecies richness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global spread of plant species by humans is both a fascinating large scale experiment and, in many cases, a major perturbation to native plant communities. Many of the most destructive weeds today have been intentionally introduced to new environments where they have had unexpected and detrimental impacts. This 2003 book considers the problem of invasive introduced plants from historical, ecological and sociological perspectives. We consider such questions as 'What makes a community invasible?', 'What makes a plant an invader?' and 'Can we restore plant communities after invasion?' Written with advanced students and land managers in mind, this book contains practical explanations, case studies and an introduction to basic techniques for evaluating the impacts of invasive plants. An underlying theme is that experimental and quantitative evaluation of potential problems is necessary, and solutions must consider the evolutionary and ecological constraints acting on species interactions in newly invaded communities.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.149 · 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