DIRECTIONAL TREE FELLING BY BEAVERS (CASTOR CANADENSIS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract By measuring the falling angle of 888 trees of a variety of sizes cut near 8 different dams in southwestern Saskatchewan, we tested the hypothesis that beavers (Castor canadensis) fell trees in a non-random direction. We predicted that trees would be preferentially felled towards the dam to minimize the costs of transporting materials to the dam and to minimize the amount of time beavers spend on land. We established a 150 m wide × 250 m long transect at each dam and determined the felling angle of at least 100 aspen trees cut in each transect. We found that trees were felled by beavers with a mean felling angle of 357.9°, a direction not significantly different from that of the dam. In all, 62% of trees were felled within 45° of the direction of the dam. While our data are consistent with the hypothesis, an experimental test is required to establish the reason(s) for the pattern we found.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".