MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6923691506 · doi:10.14288/1.0444916

Monitoring the Frequency and Severity of Bird Collisions : An Analysis of Factors Influencing the UBC Chan Centre and Wall Institute

2024· article· en· W6923691506 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollisionPeriod (music)Collision frequencyOrder (exchange)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bird-building collisions are the leading cause in avian mortality, accounting annually for millions of mortal collisions in Canada. Because of the important contribution birds have to the ecosystem, it is necessary to understand how and why these collisions occur. Using modified methodology, this monitoring project aims to determine the frequency and severity of bird collisions at the Chan Centre and Wall Institute located on UBC’s Vancouver campus. Over an eight week period between February 5th 2024 and March 29th 2024, building facades were monitored frequently and collision evidence recorded. It was found that 30 total collisions occurred over this period, with significantly higher frequency located at facades with continuous glass and high proximity to vegetation. The high frequency and severity of bird collisions located at the Chan Centre and Wall Institute during this period is evidence that proactive solutions are needed in order to reduce collision occurrences. As this is the first year the Chan Centre or the Wall Institute are being monitored, future research is needed to identify the frequency of collisions and the priority areas for migration. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicWildlife-Road Interactions and ConservationFrench-language works237,207