COMMON RAVEN NESTS IN NORTH DAKOTA AFTER 100-YEAR\nHIATUS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our observations represent the first documented nesting by the common raven in North Dakota since the late 1800's. Houston (1977) suggested that the expansion of the American crow onto the Canadian prairies was limited by the scarcity of trees for nest sites, which also might have limited the extent of the common raven. Aspen woodland has increased substantially in and around J. Clark Salyer National Wildlife Refuge since European settlement, due primarily to fire suppression and extirpation of large herbivores (Grant and Murphy 2005). Thus, plausibly these increases in woodland habitat might be providing nest sites necessary for the common raven to recolonize the region. Conversely, the common raven is currently a year-round resident in northern McHenry County, in the Turtle Mountains (Bottineau and Rolette counties), and in the Pembina Hills (Pembina and Cavalier counties), areas which represented extensive natural woodland areas prior to settlement of the region. Common raven numbers have increased during the second half of the twentieth century, and the common raven has returned to parts of its previous range (Boarman and Heinrich 1999). Indeed, analysis of Breeding Bird Survey routes from 1966 through 2003 indicates an increasing population trend for the common raven across most of its range in North America. An increase of greater than 1.5% change per year is indicated for neighboring northwestern Minnesota, southern Manitoba, and southeastern Saskatchewan (Sauer et al. 2008). Possibly, these opportunistic Corvids are adapting to and expanding into previously unoccupied habitats.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".