MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7128361176 · doi:10.5962/p.297250

An Assessment of Yourdamung and Nalyerin Lakes in the Jarrah Forest Region of Western Australia

2012· article· W7128361176 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern Australian naturalist · 2012
Typearticle
Language
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPasture and Agricultural Systems
Canadian institutionsDepartment of Environment and Conservation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVegetation (pathology)PopulationForest coverBiodiversity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surveys of fringing and aquatic plants, birds and aquatic macro-invertebrate species were carried out at Lake Yourdamung and Lake Nalyerin during 2002.The purpose of this survey was to determine whether Lake Yourdamung, situated on private land, was suitable for inclusion into the Lane-Poole Reserve.Results provided technical and scientific support of an application for land acquisition, which proved to be successful and the 81 ha (182 acres) property was purchased in 2004.After applying wetland functional indices to a range of wetland characteristics, Lake Yourdamung was rated as partially degraded due to draining and clearing (50%) of its fringing vegetation.Despite these interventions, it had retained good water quality and a high diversity of plant, bird and aquatic invertebrate fauna.Lake Nalyerin in comparison was in near natural condition but had suffered some degradation due to vehicle damage of the reed beds.Lake Yourdamung with some remedial restoration could in time return to a near-natural condition and form an important wetland environment, the only one on the Bingham River system.Lakes Yourdamung and Nalyerin appear to meet criteria for listing in the Directory of Important Wetlands in Australia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.276 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWestern Australian naturalistSame topicPasture and Agricultural SystemsFrench-language works237,207