MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7055260552

The 2000 Canadian Peregrine Falcon Survey

2024· article· en· W7055260552 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersParks CanadaAlberta Conservation Association
KeywordsFalconGeorge (robot)Plan (archaeology)Wildlife refuge
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRCT.--Nationalsurveys for Peregrine Falcons (Falco peregrinus) have been conducted in Canada every five years since 1970.This paper discusses the results of the seventh such survey.In 2000, 22 areas in nine provinces and three territories were searched for three peregrine subspecies.Within the continental E p. anatum range, 374 sites were occupied by territorial peregrines.As in previous surveys, the majority of anatum sites were located in the western boreal ecoregion.However, numbers are increasing in populations south of 58N.The number of E p. tundrius in 2000 was similar to previous surveys at Rankin Inlet, Nunavut and Tuktut Nogait National Park, Northwest Territories.Nine sites occupied on the North Slope of the Yukon Territory is a slight increase in this tundrius subgroup.Coastal E p. pealei, on the Queen Charlotte Islands appear to have been stable for at least the past two decades.Pealei numbers on the north shore of Vancouver Island and the surrounding area were substantially higher in 2000--largely the result of a more extensive search effort.Reproductive output in 2000 was 1.0 or more young/territorial pair, except in the anatum subpopulations of northern Alberta and the Peel River, Yukon Territory where it was 0.7 and 0.6 young/territorial pair, respectively.Overall, with stable populations in the north and growing populations in the south, the peregrine recovery is well underway and in some areas, approaching historical size and probably ecological carrying capacity.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.186 · 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