MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999071421 · doi:10.1016/s1631-0691(03)00045-3

Conservation of endangered species and the patterns and propensities of biodiversity

2003· article· en· W1999071421 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueComptes Rendus Biologies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiodiversityHabitat destructionEndangered speciesHabitatEcologyFunction (biology)Natural (archaeology)Construct (python library)Loss functionBiologyEvolutionary biologyComputer sciencePhenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is commonly asserted in the ecological and economic literature that habitat loss is the main cause of loss of imperiled species. The evidence clearly shows that habitat loss is a common contributing factor, but there is little evidence that it is the most important factor. Studies that have focused on the mechanisms of species loss have failed to produce models capable of predicting patterns of loss as a function of human activities. I propose that this is because ecologists have employed an unrealistic conceptual model of the functioning of natural systems. Karl Popper's construct of the propensities of natural systems provides a more realistic view, and better potential to yield predictive models. I provide two examples of patterns of biodiversity and species loss in Canada where mechanistic reasoning is inconsistent with the observed propensities of species loss.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

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 studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.180 · 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