Species’ geographic ranges and distributional limits: pattern analysis and statistical issues
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
With the increasing concern about species conservation, a need exists for quantitaive characterization of species’ geographic range and their borders. In this paper, we survey tools appropriate for the quantification of static spatial patterns related to geographical ranges and their borders. We then build on these static methods to consider the problem of changes in geographic range through time. Methods discussed are illustrated using lark sparrow data from the North American Breeding Bird Survey. While there is no such thing as the “best” or “only” method to analyze species geographical range and border, we show that a series of methods can be used in sequence to provide complementary and useful quantitative information for species occupancy of range. Indeed, the location of species’ borders estimated at different times can be compared to identify locations where species expand or go locally extinct. The ability to delineate accurately species’ ranges will be useful to conservation biologists, managers and ecologists.
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) | 0.001 | 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