MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978740612 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003700

Converting Endangered Species Categories to Probabilities of Extinction for Phylogenetic Conservation Prioritization

2008· article· en· W1978740612 on OpenAlexafffund
Arne Ø. Mooers, Daniel P. Faith, Wayne P. Maddison

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSociety of Systematic Biologists
KeywordsIUCN Red ListExtinction (optical mineralogy)Endangered speciesPrioritizationExtinction probabilityStability (learning theory)Rank (graph theory)Transformation (genetics)Simple (philosophy)Phylogenetic treeBiologyComputer scienceStatisticsEcologyMathematicsCombinatoricsMachine learningEconomicsGeneticsPaleontologyDemographyManagement sciencePopulationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Categories of imperilment like the global IUCN Red List have been transformed to probabilities of extinction and used to rank species by the amount of imperiled evolutionary history they represent (e.g. by the Edge of Existence programme). We investigate the stability of such lists when ranks are converted to probabilities of extinction under different scenarios. METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Using a simple example and computer simulation, we show that preserving the categories when converting such list designations to probabilities of extinction does not guarantee the stability of the resulting lists. SIGNIFICANCE: Care must be taken when choosing a suitable transformation, especially if conservation dollars are allocated to species in a ranked fashion. We advocate routine sensitivity analyses.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.300
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.136 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations161
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207