MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ecosystem Health and Its Measurement at Landscape Scale: Toward the Next Generation of Quantitative Assessments

2001· article· en· W1999251659 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcosystem Health · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphWestern University
FundersU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsGeospatial analysisData scienceScale (ratio)Ecosystem healthTemporal scalesEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceGeographyResource (disambiguation)Spatial ecologyEcosystem servicesEcosystemEcologyCartographyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The purpose of this paper is twofold: (A) to describe the challenges of reporting on changes in ecosystem health at landscape scales, and (B) to review the statistical and mathematical techniques that allow the derivation of landscape health assessments from a variety of data consisting of remote sensing imagery, demographic and socioeconomic censuses, natural resource surveys, long‐term ecological research, and other geospatial information that is site specific. We draw upon seven innovative and integrative concepts and tools that together will provide the next generation of ecosystem health assessments at regional scales. The first is the concept of ecosystem health, which integrates across the social, natural, physical, and health sciences to provide the basis for comprehensive assessments of regional environments. The second consists of innovative stochastic techniques for representing human disturbance and ecosystem response in landscapes, and the corresponding statistical tools for analyzing them. The third constitutes representation of spatial biocomplexity in landscapes through application of echelon analysis to assessment. The fourth concerns innovative combination techniques of upper‐echelon‐based spatial scan statistic to detect, delineate, and prioritize critical study areas for evaluating and prioritizing causal factors and effects. The fifth involves the capability of comparing and prioritizing a collection of entities in light of multiple criteria, using poset mathematics of partial order with rank frequency statistics, to provide multicriterion decision support. The sixth lies in extending data mining and visualization techniques to determine associations between geospatial patterns and ecosystem degradation at landscape scales. The seventh encompasses comprehensive studies conducted on different types of regional ecosystems. Our focus is to show how the integration of recent advances in quantitative techniques and tools will facilitate the evaluation of ecosystem health and its measurement at a variety of landscape scales. The challenge is to characterize, evaluate, and validate linkages between socioeconomic drivers, biogeochemical indicators, multiscale landscape pattern metrics, and quality of human life indicators. Initial applications of these quantitative techniques and tools have been with respect to regions in the eastern United States, including the U.S. Atlantic Slope and mid‐Atlantic region.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.702
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.174 · 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