MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7070915628

The Reintroduction of Wolves

2022· article· en· W7070915628 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholar Works (Boise State University) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildlifeEndangered speciesWildlife managementWildlife conservationPredationLivestockPredatorBalance of natureFish <Actinopterygii>
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1995, wolves were relocated from Canada and reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park. This was done in hopes to thin out rising elk populations, decrease overgrazing, and balance out the ecosystem. Currently, Idaho’s wolf populations have multiplied by 73 times since 1995. This has caused both negative and positive impacts politically, economically and environmentally. In 2011, wolves were taken off the endangered list and made legal to hunt and trap in Idaho. The research in this project will show changes in wolf populations, harvest rates, and livestock depredation over the last decade. The data collected has been taken from the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. They have conducted wolf management reports since 2009 using; trail cameras, radio telemetry, and various capturing methods. Wolves populate very quickly, making them a devastating predator to wildlife and livestock. Hunting, trapping and private management strategies can help balance out predators while bringing in lots of money that is recycled back into conservation efforts. Predator management can be an extremely sustainable way to protect wildlife and bring revenue to the state of Idaho.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.191
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

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholar Works (Boise State University)Same topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207