MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6980538322

Changes in winter habitat use by mammals following commercial thinning of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) in west central Alberta / by Kyle Emslie.

2010· dissertation· en· W6980538322 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University) · 2010
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHomicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTransectThinningPinus contortaHabitatBlack spruceSnowshoe hareBelt transectForest management
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"In 1996, Millar Western Forest Products initiated an adaptive management experiment to assess the potential benefits of commercial thinning and to monitor its effects on winter habitat use by multiple mammalian species, using indirect evidence (snow tracking). This program was known as the Commercial Thinning Winter Tracking Project (CTWTP). Track surveys are well suited to investigate habitat use, because transects can be restricted to specific habitat types and individual tracks can often indicate behaviour based on gait, movement pattern and other signs associated with the tracks. Differences in the frequency of track occurrence among habitat types can also indicate habitat preference. The CTWTP surveyed mammal track occurrence over 7 years on 30 transects within the 1695 ha Tom Hill study site southwest of Whitecourt, Alberta. Transects were located in one of four forest types: aspen dominated, black spruce dominated, reference lodgepole pine, and treatment (thinned) lodgepole pine. ANOVA and Tukey post-hoc tests were used to identify differences in mammal track occurrence among the three unthinned forest types and between the reference and treatment pine forest types. Moose and weasels were most common in black spruce. Snowshoe hare were most common in reference lodgepole pine.

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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University)Same topicHomicide, Infanticide, and Child AbuseFrench-language works237,207