MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Percent cover of tundra plant species at twelve repeat-monitoring plots (1999-2017) on Qikiqtaruk-Herschel Island, Yukon, Canada

2018· dataset· en· W6912892933 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNERC Environmental Data Service · 2018
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTundraVegetation (pathology)Plant coverVegetation coverCover (algebra)LitterPlant community

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dataset contains the percentage cover of plant species, bare ground and litter from twelve 1x1m vegetation monitoring plots. Plots are from two distinct vegetation communities (Herschel, Komakuk) approximately 500m apart. Plots were established in 1999 and monitored in 2004, 2009, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017. Data is presented as total percentage cover per species (not relative cover). Funding was provided by the NERC grant NE/M016323/1.

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), Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0050.007
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.013

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.201 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNERC Environmental Data ServiceFrench-language works237,207