C. SUPPORTING STATEMENT 1. Taxonomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
21. Distribution: Ursus arctos is the most widespread of bear species, ranging from northern Arctic to dry desert habitats throughout the northern hemisphere. Servheen (1990) estimated that by 1989, the species ’ range and numbers worldwide had been reduced by more than 50 % since the mid-I 800s and that the future of the species worldwide can only be assured in those areas comprising the northeastern and northwestern Soviet Union, Alaska, and Canada. In China, Ursus arctos is distributed over three major areas of the country, two of them represented by the sub-populations ascribed to the CITES Appendix-! subspecies, U. a. isabel/inus and U. a. pruinosus (Figure). As described by Ma (1983), Ursus arctos isabeiinus inhabits forests at elevations of 700-4 000 m in central Asia, in the Tien-Shan and Pamir Mountains of western Xinjiang 29 MAMMALIA (1) Uygur; U. arctospruinosus occurs at elevations of 4 500-5 000 m on the alpine grassy steppes and cold deserts of Qinghai-Xizang (Tibet) plateau from Qinghai and Kansu (Gansu province) south to Western Sichuan and Xizang (Tibet); and U. a. lasiotus occurs in forested areas of northeastern China in the Tahinganling, Wanda, and Changbai Mountains. Habitat loss and encroachment by man combined with unregulated harvest are causing contraction of Ursus arctos’ range and accelerating insularization of its populations throughout China (Servheen, 1990). Tien-Shan and the Pamir Mountains of Xinjiang Uygur (U. a. isabeiinus): This poputation was formerly part of the population ranging across the whole of the north terr~perate zone in Asia, Europe and North America. It is now restricted
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 | 0.005 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.799 | 0.639 |
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".