Uncontrolled dog activity and problem areas in urban parks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Domestic dogs are a significant, but poorly recognised, threat to native wildlife inhabiting natural environments within urban areas. The main driver of dog abundance and habitat use is human presence. The objective of this study is to determine the level of uncontrolled dog activity (off-leash, without human accompaniment) in on-leash designated areas within the City of Calgary, to identify off-leash problem areas, and to provide recommendations to parks management on how to reduce the impacts of domestic dogs on wildlife in city parks. There was a lot of documented off-leash dog activity in all natural areas with camera traps, and the majority occurred in on-leash areas. A large portion of uncontrolled dogs occurred within 250 m of off-leash designated areas (the majority occurring within 50 m), suggesting that a lack of public awareness of where off-leash areas end and on-leash areas begin may be contributing to the high off-leash rates. The results also suggest that dog owners behave similarly with respect to dog leashing regardless of leash rules. An increased vigilance by the city and increased public awareness of the effects that domestic dogs have on wildlife, through means such as signage in problem areas, could help to decrease the number of off-leash dogs in on-leash designated areas and the effects that dogs have on wildlife in Calgary.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".