MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6947790286 · doi:10.4454/db.v8i2.146

A survey of the main behavioural and natatorial issues observed in non-genetically selected dog breeds trained for water rescue activities

2022· article· en· W6947790286 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCINECA IRIS Institutial research information system (University of Pisa) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreedWildlifeAnimal welfareGermanCertification

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

: In this survey, we collected information on non-genetically selected pure breed dogs trained for water rescue considering the issues highlighted by the instructors of the Italian School of Water Rescue Dogs (S.I.C.S.) in Italy over a one-year period. A questionnaire was developed and emailed to thirteen S.I.C.S. sections asking for information on the number of certificates and services carried out in one year, the pure breed dogs used, and the main problems detected in each breed. Only six questionnaires were received and processed. The results revealed that a total of 82 (14.0 as average value) dog-human dyads with certificates with a total number of 157 (26.17 as average value) services recorded in one summer All sections reported certified dogs from three genetically selected breeds (Newfoundland, Labrador, and Golden Retriever), mixed-breed dogs, and other pure-breed dogs, such as Bernese Mountain Dog, Doberman, Pitbull, German Shepherd, and American Staffordshire Terrier dogs. The main problems highlighted in non-genetically selected pure breed dogs were natatorial, linked to an incorrect set-up or to a lack of tail and/or undercoat. To solve these problems, neoprene underwear and/or floating harnesses were used, and the instructors tried to improve the swimming attitude.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCINECA IRIS Institutial research information system (University of Pisa)Same topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207