MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6910219893 · doi:10.48448/7cz2-v234

Urban gulls of the Pacific coast of North America: Balancing wildlife conflict concerns with the protection of urban breeding sites

2021· other· en· W6910219893 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUnderline Science Inc. · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNest (protein structural motif)WildlifePopulationWork (physics)Wildlife conservationReproductive successWildlife management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Gulls are one of the very few avian taxa to occur on all continents, and many species have adapted remarkably well to living alongside humans in urban environments. Paradoxically, many of these species continue to experience overall population declines, even as urban-nesting populations grow. In this talk, we will present details about several gull species that occupy the Pacific coast of North America: Glaucous-winged (Larus glaucescens), Western (L. occidentalis), Herring (L. argentatus), Mew (L. canus), and Heermann's (L. heermanni). Drawing on six years of field work across Canada and the US, we will compare and contrast the urban ecologies of these species with those of their declining, non-urban conspecifics. Nest site demographics, as well as colony density, nest fidelity, and reproductive success figures will be presented. We will also discuss several spatial models that we have developed to predict urban-nesting behaviour in these species. As urban-nesting becomes more commonplace, a host of new human-wildlife conflicts can arise, as well as many exciting conservation opportunities. These issues and ideas demand a deeper knowledge of the breeding ecology of urban gulls, and our work represents another step toward this. Authors: Edward Kroc¹, Louise Blight² ¹University of British Columbia, ²Procellaria Research & Consulting

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.417
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUnderline Science Inc.French-language works237,207