Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT. In the Arctic, there is great concern for several eider populations, including the northern common eider (Somateria mollissima borealis) breeding in Canada and Greenland. In 1998 –2001, extensive ground surveys were conducted on 937 potential nesting islands in West Greenland, covering most of the districts of Ilulissat, Uummannaq, and Upernavik (69˚15 ' N to 74˚05 ' N). On 216 islands within 106 eider colonies, 4097 ± 468 active nests were identified. In 15 colonies where comparable and well-documented surveys were conducted approximately 40 years ago, the study shows a population decline of 81 % (from 3361 to 624 nests). A rough comparison shows that of 51 eider colonies surveyed in 1920, 1960, or 1965, 71 % either were gone or had declined in breeding numbers when resurveyed in 1998 –2001. At the colony level, the 1998 –2001 surveys revealed large year-to-year variations in nesting numbers. The reason for the overall decline is not clear. However, there is circumstantial evidence that harvest of common eiders in West Greenland is a key factor. The results urgently call for more cautious management of the northern common eider population. Key words: northern common eider, Somateria mollissima borealis, West Greenland, breeding population, population decline, harvest RÉSUMÉ. On se préoccupe beaucoup dans l’Arctique de plusieurs populations d’eiders, y compris l’eider à duvet (Somateria mollissima borealis) qui se reproduit au Canada et au Groenland. De 1998 à 2001, on a procédé à de vastes relevés au sol sur 937 îles susceptibles d’abriter des nids dans l’ouest du Groenland, une zone qui recouvrait la plupart des districts d’Ilulissat, d’Uummannaq et d’Upernavik (69 ° 15 ' de latit. N. à 74 ° 05 ' de latit. N.) Sur 216 îles situées à l’intérieur de 106 colonies d’eiders,
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.428 | 0.316 |
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".