"Where There Was Fire, Sounds Remain: Changes in Bird Activity Patterns in the Sub-Arctic Boreal Forest of Churchill, Manitoba, Canada."
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este estudio evalúa las diferencias entre un bosque conservado y uno quemado, empleando el Índice de Diversidad Acústica (ADI) y el Índice de Bioacústica (BIO) como herramientas principales. Ambos índices se calcularon mediante grabaciones acústicas tomadas a intervalos regulares durante 35 días para identificar diferencias entre los sitios. Mediante modelos de efectos mixtos generalizados (GLMM), se analizaron los efectos del disturbio, la temperatura y la hora del día sobre los índices calculados. Los valores de ADI y BIO fueron consistentemente mayores en el bosque conservado y resultaron estadísticamente significativos. Se evidenciaron diferencia en la riqueza de especies y cinco especies indicadoras presentaron diferencias en su actividad vocal entre los dos bosques. Estos hallazgos resaltan la complejidad de las respuestas bioacústicas al disturbio y subrayan la utilidad de los índices acústicos y bioacústicos para evaluar patrones ecológicos, incluso en escenarios donde las diferencias no son marcadas. Este enfoque proporciona información clave para la gestión y conservación de hábitats boreales en el contexto de cambio climático y las perturbaciones antropogénicas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".