MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Insect Data from Grassland and Woodland Quadrat Samples

2014· dataset· en· W6958386290 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2014
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSports Dynamics and Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuadratWoodlandGrasslandGlobal biodiversityStanding cropSampling (signal processing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data was collected using ten quadrat samples taken in both a grassland and woodland area in Toronto Ontario. The quadrants were used to observe species identity, number of insects in each species, total number of species, and the total number of insects. The data included insects in the quadrat ground area and insects flying within a meter above the quadrat. This data was collected by P Chow, N Gajendran, C Lau, and T Sequeira who all had designated roles in the data collection process. N Gajendran took five steps in any direction in attempt to keep quadrant sampling relatively random. N Gajendran identified a species while P Chow counted the number of insects in the quadrat of that species. T Sequeira identified flying species flying within a meter above the quadrat while C Lau counted the number of insects of that species. Data was recordedand number of insects of each species were added to record total number of insects within quadrat area.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.001

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicSports Dynamics and BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207