25 Chapter 2 Sand Hill Arthropods in Canadian Grasslands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Sand hill environments in the Canadian grasslands can be classified as sandstone outcrops, upland dunes, sand features associated with water, non-human disturbances, anthropogenic disturbances, beach dunes, or sandbars. Insects and other arthropods use these environments for burrow construction, access to sand-associated host plants, open ground predation and scavenging, thermoregulation, and locomotion in a quiet substrate. The arthropod faunas of sand hills in the Canadian grasslands are diverse, include organisms that are specific to sand hills, and include a number of rare or endemic taxa. Dune stabilization is cause for conservation concern, whereas the threat of global warming may reverse the stabilizing trend and create larger areas of open drifting sand. Résumé. Les milieux dunaires des prairies canadiennes peuvent être divisés en plusieurs catégories: affleurements de grès, dunes des hautes terres, terrains sableux liés à la présence de l’eau ou aux perturbations liées ou non à l’homme, plages ou barres de sable. Les insectes et les autres arthropodes utilisent ces milieux pour creuser leurs terriers, accéder aux plantes hôtes adaptées à ces conditions, profiter du terrain découvert pour trouver leurs proies vivantes ou mortes, assurer leur thermorégulation et se déplacer sans bruit. La faune des arthropodes des dunes des prairies canadiennes est diversifiée et comprend des organismes spécialement adaptés à ce milieu, y compris un certain nombre de taxons rares ou endémiques. La stabilisation et la préservation des dunes suscitent des préoccupations, et le changement climatique risque de renverser la tendance à la stabilisation et de créer ainsi de
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.001 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".