MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte

An Introduction to the Practice of Ecological Modeling

2000· article· en· W2111888236 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueBioScience · 2000
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueSustainability and Ecological Systems Analysis
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Calgary
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésProcess (computing)Field (mathematics)EcologyTable (database)Computer scienceSociologyOperations researchEngineeringMathematicsBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

odeling has become an important tool in the study of ecological systems,as a scan of the table of con tents of a ny major eco l ogical journ a l makes abundantly clear. A number of books have recently been published that provide excellent advice on mo del construction, building, and use (e.g.,Gotelli 1995, Gurney and Nisbet 1998, Roughgarden 1998) and add to the classic literature on mo deling ecological systems and their dynamics (e.g., Maynard Smith 1974, Nisbet and Gurney 1 9 8 2 ) . Un fortu n a tely, h owever, l i t t l e — i f a ny — of t h i s growing literature on e cological modeling addresses the motivation to model and the initial stages of the modeling process, information that beginning students would find useful. Fast computers and graphical software packages have removed much of the drudgery of creating models with a programming language and opened new avenues of model construction,use,and even misuse. There are many reasons why a student might want to consider modeling as a component of his or her education. Models p rovide an opportunity to explo re ideas regarding ecological systems that it may not be possible to field-test for logistical, political, or financial reasons. Often, learning occurs from apparently st range results and unexpected sur prises. The process of formulating an e cological model is ext remely helpful for organizing one’s thinking , bringing hidden assumptions to light, and identifying data needs. More and more,students want to “do something” with modeling but are not sure how to get started. The goals of this article are to outline issues concerning the value of ecological models and some possible motivations for mo deling, and to provide an entry point to the established modeling literature so that those who are beginning to think about using models in their research can integrate modeling usefully. We therefore envision the typical reader to be an advanced undergraduate, a beginning graduate student, or a new modeler. We first consider some of the values of models and the motivation for modeling. We then discuss the steps involved in developing a mo del from an initial idea to something that is implemented on a computer, outlining some of the decisions that must be ma de along the way. Many excellent texts and journal articles deal with the technical details of models and model construction; we do not attempt to replace this literature, but rather try to make the reader aware of the issues that must be considered and point to some of the sources we have found particularly useful. We b egin with the assumption that the reader has decided that he or she would like to “do something” with modeling as part of his or her research (Figure 1). It is important to recognize the difference between models and the modeling process. A model is a representation of a particular thing, idea, or condition. Models can be as simple as a verbal statement about a subje ct or two boxes c onnected by an arrow to represent some r elationship. Alternatively, models can be ext remely c omplex and detailed, such as a mathematical description of the pathways o f nitrogen t ransformations within ecosystems. The model ing process is the series of steps taken to convert an idea first into a conceptual model and then into a quantitative m odel . Because part of what eco l ogists do is revi s e hypotheses and collect new data, the model and the view of nature that it r epresents often und ergo many changes from the initial conception to what is d eemed the final product. The discussion that follows is organized to consider issues in a sequence similar to what a new modeler would encounter. Because individuals’ backgrounds differ, the sequence is not fixed. We map one possible route through the sorts of decisions that will most lik ely need to be considered; this course is derived from our individual experiences plus the collective knowledge o f our reviewers. We begin with conceptual models because many people, even self-labeled nonmodelers, formulate conceptual models.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: Simulation ou modélisation
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,333
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,997

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,010
Tête enseignante GPT0,252
Écart entre enseignants0,242 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle