Evolutionary Distinctiveness, Threat Status, and Ecological Oddity in Primates
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The EDGE (evolutionarily distinct and globally endangered) conservation program (http://www.edgeofexistence.org) uses a composite measure of threat and phylogenetic isolation to rank species for conservation attention. Using primates as a test case, we examined how species that rank highly with this metric represent the collective from which they are drawn. We considered the ecological and morphological traits, including body mass, diet, terrestriality, and home range size, of all 233 species of primates. Overall, EDGE score and the level of deviance from the mean of 20 different ecological, reproductive, and morphological variables were correlated (mean correlation r =0.14, combined p =1.7 x 10(-14)). Although primates with a high EDGE score had characteristics that made them seem odd, they did not seem to express more ancestral characteristics than expected. Sets of primate species with high EDGE scores will, therefore, collectively capture a broader than expected range of the biology of the clade. If similar patterns hold in other groups, the EDGE metric may be useful for prioritizing biodiversity for conservation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it