MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7064211704

Birding in the American West: a Handbook

2000· article· en· W7064211704 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida) · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Context (archaeology)Work (physics)Natural (archaeology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some readers may remember a book entitled The Western Birdwatcher, by the same author and published in 1985.For some reason that book never made it "big," but it was regarded by many as a very useful work.Birding in the American West (hereafter BAW) is essentially an updated and expanded version of The Western Birdwatcher, and I hope it reaches a larger market, for it contains much of value.The geographic scope of BAW is vast and comprises the "western" United States from the eastern boundaries of the Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas westward, including Alaska.Canada is not included, so the title is a political misnomer.BAW comprises five chapters, plus a single appendix, a bibliography, and an index.Chapter 1 is a concise discussion of techniques that can help in finding any bird species, not simply in the West.These include habitat recognition, elevation, key plant species, seasonality, time of day, bird hotlines, recommendations for pelagic trips, taping, and ethics.Chapter 2 overviews subjects that help in field identification, including structure and behavior, molt and plumage, vocalizations, the importance of preparation, and the dangers of psychological influences--how to recognize the "I wouldn't have seen it if I hadn't believed it" syndrome.A summary of key characters for different groups (shearwaters, kingbirds, vireos, etc.) is provided, with subjective judgment of the degree of identification difficulty within each group.Chapter 3 is a short discussion of why one should keep a journal, with suggestions for format and tips on how not to fall behind in keeping notes.Chapter 4 covers a selection of "difficult identifications beyond the field guides," and Chapter 5 suggests where and when to find a selection of what the author terms "western specialties," ranging from resident breeding species to rare migrants and vagrants.I recommend the first three chapters to all birders.Certain points will be obvious to

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0670.040

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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