Evaluation of ElectroBraide Fencing as a White-Tailed Deer Barrier
Bibliographic record
Abstract
White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) populations continue to increase, resulting in direct threats to public safety and increased agricultural losses. A variety of fencing methods are used to reduce deer presence at airports and agricultural areas. Electric fences may offer a less expensive alternative to expensive woven-wire fences. We tested an electric fence product, ElectroBraideTM (Yarmouth, N.S., Canada), on free-ranging deer in northern Ohio. We conducted both 1- and 2-choice tests, measuring deer intrusions and corn consumption at 10 sites encompassed with charged, non-charged or no fence. Mean daily deer intrusions decreased in each test when the fence was powered. When power was immediately applied to the fence, intrusions decreased 88–99%. When power was delayed for 10 weeks, intrusions were reduced 90%. When power was turned on and off within a 4-week period, intrusions decreased 57%. Mean corn consumption differed between treated (< 2–6.4 kg/day) and control sites (15–32 kg/day). Under the conditions and time duration of this test, the fence was an effective deer barrier.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
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".