Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report provides population status, recruitment information, harvest trends, and other information for the Mid-Continent (MCP) and Rocky Mountain (RMP) Populations of sandhill cranes. Information was compiled with the assistance of a large number of biologists from across North America. We acknowledge the contributions of: D.S. Benning, J.L. Drahota, R.C. Drewien, J.W. Solberg, P.P. Thorpe, and D.L. Fronzak for conducting annual aerial population surveys; R.C. Drewien for conducting RMP productivity surveys; E.M. Martin, K.D. Richkus, and M.H. Gendron for conducting the U.S. and Canadian Federal harvest surveys for the MCP; J. Bohne for compiling harvest information collected on sandhill cranes in the Pacific Flyway; G.L. Krapu for providing preliminary results from satellite-transmittered MCP cranes; and D.S. Benning, E.L. Boeker, D.H. Johnson, and W.L. Kendall for consultation on the analysis of data on the status of cranes. B.A. Andres and G.L. Krapu reviewed and provided comments on this report. We especially want to recognize the support of the state and provincial biologists in the Central and Pacific Flyways for the coordination of sandhill crane hunting programs and especially the distribution of crane hunting permits and assistance in conducting of annual cooperative surveys.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".