MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7057046624

Identification Criteria for Some Emberizid Sparrows

2024· article· en· W7057046624 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAmerican Museum of Natural History
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Selection (genetic algorithm)EctothermKey (lock)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Certain Emberizid sparrows that occur in northeastern United States and southeastern Canada can be difficult to identify especially in their juvenal plumages and sometimes in their first basic plumages.Generally, these birds have streaked crowns and backs and variably streaked breasts, depending on plumage.Using selected measurements or combinations thereof, I have found that five of these similar species can be reliably separated from one another.These species are Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis), Lincoln's sparrow (Melos?iza lincolnii), Swamp Sparrow (M.georgiana), Song Sparrow (M.melodia), and White-throated Sparrow (Zonotrichia albicollis ).METHODS I used the collections of the New York State Museum (NYSM) in Albany; American Museum of Natural History (AMNH) in New York City; and Museum of Comparative Zoology (MCZ) in Cambridge, Massachusetts for specimens to measure.Specimens were predominantly from New York State (60%), but included also some from New England (23%), Ontario and Quebec (4%), and the Maritime Provinces (13%).I limited mysclection in order to minimize geographic distribution and size variations that might result therefrom.I gathered also some limited data on live individuals of three species at Island Beach State Park, New Jersey.I recorded tail length (TL) and wing chord (WC, unflattene.d and unstopped) to the nearest 0.5 mm using a steel rule graduated to 1.0 mm.Similarly, I recorded a measurement I termed "tail tip" (TF) by measuring the distance from the tip of the outermost rectrix to the tip of the longest rectrix in the tail.I recorded two measurements of the bill using a divider: exposed culmen from the tip of the bill to the base of the horny sheath (=bill length or BL); and bill depth (BD) measured at the base of thebill representing the side profile of the bill, as described on pages 6-11 and Figures 6-6B and F, respectively, of North American Banding Techniques (1977).Both were measured to the nearest 0.1 min.Normally, bill depth is measured with a vernier caliper.For convenience and expediency, especiallywith live birds, I used a divider; however, on two series of specimens, I took duplicate measurements with divider and caliper to compare results.Several additional measurements were taken but are not presented here either because they were not useful due to Jan.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→