MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6958287506 · doi:10.60692/gp6gk-5gn14

Disruption of an ant-plant mutualism shapes interactions between lions and their primary prey

2023· article· en· W6958287506 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy, Science, and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlock (permutation group theory)Selection (genetic algorithm)HabitatPredationResource (disambiguation)Site selection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data and file overview: Kamaru_Path_Analysis_Data.csv Kamaru_Path_Analysis.R Kamaru_Zebra_RSF_Data.csv Kamaru_Zebra_RSF.R Layers used to build Zebra RSF: Kamaru_DWater: distance to water Kamaru_DGlade: distance to glade Kamaru_DSettlement: distance to human settlement Kamaru_OPC_Veg: vegetation layer (classes: V. drepanolobium, E. divinorum, others) SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: Kamaru_Path_Analysis_Data.csv Number of variables: 11 Description: This data file includes 105 zebra kill sites and paired random locations from June 2019 to August 2020. It also includes: (A) monthly utilization distributions of lion prides associated with each kill site and paired point; and (B) zebra densities estimated from resource selection functions, associated with each kill site, and paired random location. Please see our supplementary materials for more details on data and methods. Variable list: (A) rsf.block: Resource Selection Function blocks (block 1: Jan-Apr 2019, block 2: May-Sep 2019, block 3: Oct 2019 – Jan 2020, block 4: Feb-May 2020, block 5: Jun-Sep 2020) (B) Kill_ID: kill identifier. (C) Lion_ID: individual lion pride identifier. (D) Date (Day, Month, Year) when a specific kill occurred. (E) Zebra_kill (1 = kill site, 0 = paired random location). (F). Species: Zebra. (G) Visibility: openness measurement using a rangefinder in (m). (H) Lion_activity: Utilization distributions (UD) of lions. (I) Invasion (1 = invaded by big-headed ants, 0 = uninvaded by big-headed ants). (J) zeb.rsf: resource selection function value. (K) zeb.density: zebra density estimated from resource selection functions. SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: Kamaru_Zebra_RSF_Data.csv Number of variables: 10 Description: This data file includes 182 zebra sightings, paired with 10 random points created for each sighting/used point. Also, the data includes actual GPS locations of each sighting and the total number of zebras in each sighting. Please see our supplementary materials for more details on data and methods. Variable list: (A) Species: Zebra. (B) Date (Day, Month, Year) for that sighting. (C) Survey: count identifier (Survey 2 to 21). (D) GPS location (X and Y), longitude and latitude of that sighting location. (E) Transect: Transect number. (F) Used: (1= zebra sighting, 0 = paired point). (G) zebra.ct: total number of zebras in each sighting. R CODE SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: Kamaru_Path_Analysis.R Description: Apply this code to Kamaru_Path_Analysis_Data.csv to build nested path models. SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: Kamaru_Zebra_RSF.R Description: Apply this code to Kamaru_Zebra_RSF_Data.csv to build resource selection functions for zebra. Use the following layers: Kamaru_DWater, Kamaru_DGlade, Kamaru_DSettlement and Kamaru_OPC_Veg to build the Zebra RSF.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.405
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.154 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicPhilosophy, Science, and HistoryFrench-language works237,207