Rangeland Management Branch, Lands Division,
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Canada’s grasslands are located primarily in western Canada within the prairie provinces, but also with significant portions in the interior of British Columbia. Before European contact, their character and distribution were significantly influenced by disturbances from fire and large herbivores, which killed woody plants and produced a more arid environment where grasses were competitive. Aboriginal Indians also influenced these processes, both directly by increasing the number of fires either by accident or for strategic reasons (Lewis 1982) and indirectly through over-hunting (Kay 1994). Anthropogenic impacts were, therefore, present before European contact; whether or not these disturbances could be considered as natural is debatable. However, there is no question that the disturbances introduced through Eurocentric farming practices by settlers beginning early in the 19 th century and overtaken within the last 50 years by resource extraction economies were ecologically catastrophic. As a result, most of the grasslands have been cultivated and those that remain have been altered by grazing or severely fragmented by roads, conduits for energy, or urbanization. This chapter deals primarily with anthropogenic changes to the grasslands made since the arrival and establishment of Europeans. Résumé. Les prairies canadiennes se trouvent principalement dans l’ouest du Canada, dans les provinces des Prairies, mais il en existe également des portions importantes à l’intérieur de la Colombie-Britannique. Avant l’arrivée des Européens, leurs caractéristiques et leur répartition étaient en grande partie définies par l’action du feu et des grands
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.515 | 0.240 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".