Decomposing the process of species accumulation into area dependent and time dependent parts
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
Abstract In 1960, Preston predicted that the process of species accumulation in time (species–time relationship, STR) should be similar to the species–area relationship (SAR) and follow a power function with a slope of about 0.26. Here these two conjectures are tested using data of the spatiotemporal species accumulation in a local community of beech forest Hymenoptera. A power function species–area–time model of the form S = S 0 A z t τ gave better fits to observed species numbers than a simple power function SAR model, and was able to predict similar species turnover rates (about 9% per year) to those inferred by other methods. The STR was well fitted by a power function, although due the limited time span (8 years) a logarithmic STR pattern cannot be ruled out. STR slopes ranged between 0.01 and 0.23 and were lower than predicted by Preston. Temporal species turnover appeared to be negatively correlated to species densities and positively correlated to species body weights. Ecological guild and taxon membership did not significantly influence temporal species turnover.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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