MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7163526556 · doi:10.21199/wb47.1.8

FEATURED PHOTO: SOUTHERNMOST BREEDING OF THE NORTHERN HAWK OWL IN THE UNITED STATES

2016· article· W7163526556 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jay Carlisle

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern Birds · 2016
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell UniversityOwl Research Institute
KeywordsBorealNational parkFlatheadBreeding pairSnowTaiga

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In North America, the Northern Hawk Owl (Surnia ulula) breeds across the boreal forest of Canada and Alaska and is generally rare and irruptive in the coterminous United States (Duncan and Duncan 2014). Over the last two decades, multiple instances of breeding have been documented in northern Montana and Washington (Jessica Larson, Owl Research Institute, in litt., 2015; Washington Bird Records Committee [WBRC] 2015), suggesting that it is a rare but regular part of the breeding avifauna of the interior Northwest. In the last two decades 32 attempts at nesting have been documented in Glacier National Park and the nearby Flathead National Forest in northwestern Montana (J. Larson, in litt., 2015), as have two in Okanogan County in north-central Washington (WBRC 2015). Prior to 2014, there was a single breeding record in northern Idaho in 2001, at Snow Lake in Boundary County, and two additional summer (July and August) reports from northern Idaho (Idaho Bird Records Committee [IBRC] 2015). Most of the prior reports from Idaho (22 in all, nine confirmed; IBRC 2015) were in late fall or winter, supporting its status in the state as an irruptive visitor, predominantly in the nonbreeding season.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWestern BirdsSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207