A Report on the Aou Meeting in August
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The meeting of the .American Ornithologists• Union in Regina, Saskatchewan will stand out as worth every effort expended in going so far.From the early morning field trips to the banquet given by the Government of Saskatchewan every-thing was well organized and carried out.The papers sessions were held at the Saskatchewan !mseWI of Natural History where spare minutes could be spent viewing the excellently prepared exhibits of birds and animals.Although few of the papers dealt directly with banding, several may be of interest to EBBA members.Dr. George J. Wallace of Michigan State gave further comments on Robin losses because of insecticides on the university campus which followed up the paper given by Dr. John F. Mehner at the EBBA meeting in April.After a Robinless campus in 19.58 there was an influx of new Robins in April 1959.On April 8 1 21 birds were counted.On April 26 1 seven pairs and three singles were counted.Then began a die-off of one or more a day.47 dead and dying Robins were found.At the end of the study there remained five to ten Robins on the campus.When it is re-
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.262 | 0.101 |
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".