MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7099073564

ARCTIC

2000· article· en· W7099073564 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAppreciative Inquiry and Organizational Change
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlywayArcticAvian clutch sizeSnowWaterfowlSpring (device)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT. The numbers of brant (Branta bernicla) in the Pacific Flyway are relatively small compared to other populations of arctic geese and have declined from historic levels. Little information is available on brant from Banks Island, although the size of the island and its location in the western Canadian Arctic make it a potentially important nesting area for this species. In 1992–93, we documented the distribution of nesting brant on the southern half of Banks Island through aerial surveys and carried out ground studies at the colonies to document nesting chronology and reproductive parameters. Ten colonies were found in 1992 (n = 159 nests) and 42 colonies (including seven colonies that had been active in 1992) and five solitary nests were found in 1993 (n = 514 nests). Two-thirds (67%) of the nesting locations supported 10 or fewer nests. Most colonies (36 of 45) were located on small islands (mean = 248 m2) in inland lakes or large ponds, and the remaining colonies (n = 9) were located on the mainland near active snowy owl (Nyctea scandiaca) nests. In 1993, when June temperatures were milder and snow melted sooner than in 1992, mean date of clutch initiation was significantly earlier (12 June vs. 20 June in 1992; p < 0.001) and mean clutch size was significantly larger (3.8 vs. 3.5 in 1992; p = 0.02). An index of productivity for the 21 414 km2 area surveyed in both years was much higher in 1993 (1339 young) than in the very late spring of 1992 (347 young). The number of adult brant on the survey area was similar in both years, and the lower productivity in 1992 was due primarily to fewer pairs ’ nesting that year. Smaller clutch size and lower nesting success may also have lowered productivity in 1992, but their effects appeared to be secondary. No correlation was found between colony size and clutch size, mean number of goslings hatched, or the percentage of nests that proved successful.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0760.011

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.189 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAppreciative Inquiry and Organizational ChangeFrench-language works237,207