MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7153681844

Greater Snow Goose (chen Hyperboreus Nivalis) in Arkansas

2024· article· W7153681844 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Albert Lano

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida) · 2024
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmerican Environmental and Regional History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowGooseBayWaterfowlWinter stormStormSpring (device)Shore
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Greater Snow Goose (Chen hyperboreus nivalis) in Arkansas.--OnMarch 28, 1913, a farmer living three miles west of this city shot an adult male Greater Snow Goose in his field.The bird was seen feeding all day but no others of its species were observed near.I examined it carefully in the flesh and found it to be in perfect plumage.Dr. C. H. Luther of this city, who made it up into a skin, informed me that the specimen was in good condition and that he found only fresh wounds on the body.--ALBERTLA•O, Fayetteville, Arkansas.Feeding Wild Ducks on Sodus Bay, N.Y.--Sodus Bay, one of the largest bays on the southern shore of Lake Ontario, was the scene of an interesting experiment in the feeding of wild ducks during the months of February and March, 1913.The bay, which is a large irregularly shaped body of water, containing several islands, is frequented in the spring and fall by large numbers of ducks.The winter was unusually mild up to the first of February, and many ducks remained on a large area of the bay which was open, and where they apparently found plenty of food.About February I the weather turned suddenly cold, with heavy snow storms and high winds.This caused the bay to freeze entirely over, preventing the ducks from reaching there feeding grounds.On February 4 the weather was very stormy, and several thousand ducks were noted in places still remaining open.On February 5 Mr. Claude T. DeVille, the state game protector at Sodus Point, noted that the ducks were flying to places kept open by men harvesting ice.The ducks were very fearless and were apparently suffering from lack of food.On the succeeding day, February 6, he obtained a quantity of wheat, and tried feeding the ducks.The grain was readily eaten and he immediately wrote the New York State Conservation Commission, notifying them of the presence of the ducks and the necessity of relief measures.The Commission promptly responded, and on February 10, Mr. DeVille received word to purchase grain and feed the ducks.He first tried feeding by throwing the grain in the water, but the ducks were so weak that they apparently had difficulty in reaching bottom in sixteen feet of water.This fact alone shows the extremes to which the ducks were reduced, as they were mainly Bluebills, Redheads and Canvasbacks, all of which feed at considerable depths.He then tried placing the grain on the ice on a place scraped clear of snow near the edge of the open water.

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)0.000
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 score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.154 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida)→Same topicAmerican Environmental and Regional History→French-language works237,207→