MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7044057598

WORKING WITH LAND MANAGERS TO IDENTIFY AND MANAGE POTENTIAL\nSTOPOVER LOCATIONS FOR WHOOPING CRANES

2018· article· en· W7044057598 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInsecta mundi · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurtle Biology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHabitatPopulationPlan (archaeology)EasementGrus (genus)Whooping cough
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whooping cranes (Grus americana) of the Aransas-Wood Buffalo Population migrate 4,000 km twice each year between their nesting grounds in northern Canada and their wintering grounds on the Texas Gulf Coast. During migration, whooping cranes must land at suitable ponds or wetlands to feed or rest. The Whooping Crane Recovery Plan calls for the protection and management of whooping crane stopover locations within the migration corridor. While major stopover areas have been protected, many other smaller sites remain to be identified. Moreover, the Recovery Plan offers no specific entity to protect and manage the latter. To address these gaps in information and activity, Friends of the Wild Whoopers engaged with large land-holding entities (military bases and Indian Reservations) within the migration corridor to share information about whooping cranes and their habitat needs and identify suitable stopover sites that could be protected and managed for cranes. This cooperative effort identified up to 177 wetlands/ponds as potential stopover sites on 14 military bases in Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas, and as many as 1,275 on 6 Indian Reservations in North and South Dakota, with commitments to manage the habitats as resources allow.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.232 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsecta mundiSame topicTurtle Biology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207