"Shorebirds of North America, Europe and Asia" by R. Chandler. 2009. [book review]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
permits is now essential in most, if not all, areas of the continent.It still is OK to listen and watch in most as long as it does not involve trespassing on private property without permission, but disturbing of animals or habitats is increasingly discouraged.The concluding sections cover the making of the book, acknowledgments, and credits for the photographs, the sound recordings, compact disc track description (mentioned earlier), sources and a sparse list for further reading (five field guides, four reference works, one on keeping frogs and toads as pets, six nonprofit and governmental websites, three volunteer monitoring programs (including Frogwatch Canada), regional websites, and three audio guides.Finally, a five-page index to species and groups concludes the book.As a visual and auditory introduction to frogs, toads and their kin in North America, this book is outstanding.It would be a useful and relatively inexpensive addition to any reference shelf, a conversation starter on any coffee tables and a treasured gift for any natureappreciative and inquisitive relative or friend.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.021 |
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".