MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Surveying Different Insects Using Pan Traps

2014· dataset· en· W6976749188 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2014
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Methods and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)White (mutation)Water pipe

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Researcher's went to York University's Grassland's and Woodlots and surveyed different insects using pan traps. A total of 18 bowls(pans) of different colours were taken to set up these pan traps. There was an even amount of each colour: white blue and yellow to make a total of 18 bowls.A jug of soapy water was also filled and taken to do this survey.First the bowls were placed at the Grassland's in a pattern:white,blue,yellow,white,blue... linearly on the ground 1 m away from each other. They were each then filled quarter way with soapy water. The remaining 9 bowls were placed in the same pattern in the Woodlots. The bowls were not disturbed for about 2 hours. After the two hours, the researcher's went back and collected data based on what they saw in the pan traps.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.012

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 head0.286
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 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 topicEducation Methods and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207