MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6912911772 · doi:10.5443/1627

Monitoring of the relative abundance of tundra bird and mammal species encountered daily on Bylot Island, Nunavut

2016· dataset· en· W6912911772 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Polar Data Network · 2016
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTundraRelative species abundanceAbundance (ecology)ArcticAerial surveyDistance samplingThe arcticMammalInvertebrate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relative abundance of species is recorded as the number of individuals seen per hour spent in the field per observer. Each observer records the animal species encountered in the field and the number of individuals observed daily. To correct for any potential biases, the activities and the mode of transportation of observers is also taken into account. We also monitor the nests of bird species that are not part of our long-term monitoring and are found opportunistically, such as Arctic Tern, King Eider, Long-tailed Duck, Red-throated Loon, Pacific Loon, Rock Ptarmigan and Horned Lark.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.215
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.248
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Polar Data NetworkFrench-language works237,207