Jupiter Inlet Green Turtle Telemetry Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is the OBIS extraction of the Ocean Tracking Network and Inwater Research Group (IRG) Jupiter Inlet Green Turtle Telemetry Study, consisting of the release tagging metadata, i.e. the location and date when the tagged animal was released, and summarized detection events of tagged individuals. If readers are interested in the source dataset they may also inquire with the project PIs as listed here or on the OTN web site (https://members.oceantrack.org/project?ccode=JTUR). Abstract:Since March of 2005, Inwater Research Group, Inc. (IRG) has been conducting marine turtle population assessments in the Lake Worth Lagoon on behalf of the Palm Beach County Department of Environmental Resources Management (PBCERM). In 2017, the scope of this project was extended to include Jupiter Inlet, and recent research efforts documented considerable numbers of juvenile green turtles. We plan to continue capture efforts in Jupiter Inlet to gather data on the size class distribution, fibropapillomatosis (FP) incidence and severity, and dietary preferences of sea turtles in the area. In addition, we plan to attach acoustic receivers to 8 juvenile green turtles to look the movement patterns of green turtles in the area. Specifically, we are interested in looking at whether turtles in the Jupiter Inlet have very small home ranges, or are utilizing the larger Lake Worth Lagoon habitat system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.009 |
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".