MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008358340 · doi:10.1890/07-1306.1

SENSITIVITY OF POPULATION VIABILITY TO SPATIAL AND NONSPATIAL PARAMETERS USING GRIP

2008· article· en· W2008358340 on OpenAlexafffund
J. M. R. Curtis, Ilona Naujokaitis‐Lewis

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Applications · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaParks Canada
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)Population viability analysisBiological dispersalMetapopulationPopulationStatisticsVital ratesHabitatEcologyComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceMathematicsEngineeringBiologyPopulation growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metapopulation dynamics are influenced by spatial parameters including the amount and arrangement of suitable habitat, yet these parameters may be uncertain when deciding how to manage species or their habitats. Sensitivity analyses of population viability analysis (PVA) models can help measure relative parameter influences on predictions, identify research priorities for reducing uncertainty, and evaluate management strategies. Few spatial PVAs, however, include sensitivity analyses of both spatial and nonspatial parameters, perhaps because computationally efficient tools for such analyses are lacking or inaccessible. We developed GRIP, a program to facilitate sensitivity analysis of spatial and nonspatial input parameters for PVAs created in RAMAS Metapop, a widely applied software program. GRIP creates random sets of input files by varying parameters specified in the PVA model including vital rates and their correlations among populations, the number and configuration of populations, dispersal rates, dispersal survival, initial population abundances, carrying capacities, and the probability, intensity, and spatial extent of catastrophes, while drawing on specified parameter distributions. We evaluated GRIP's performance as a tool for sensitivity analysis of spatial PVAs and explored the consequences of varying spatial input parameters for predictions of a published PVA model of the sand lizard (Lacerta agilis). We used GRIP output to generate standardized regression coefficients (SRCs) and nonparametric correlation coefficients as indices of the relative sensitivity of predicted conservation status to input parameters. GRIP performed well; with a single analysis we were able to rank the relative influence of input parameters identified as influential by the PVA's original author, S. A. Berglind, who used three separate forms of sensitivity analysis. Our analysis, however, also underscored the value of exploring the relative influence of spatial parameters on PVA predictions; both SRCs and correlation coefficients indicated that the most influential parameters in the sand lizard model were spatial in nature. We provide annotated code so that GRIP may be modified to reflect particular species biology, customized for more complex spatial PVA models, upgraded to incorporate features added in newer versions of RAMAS Metapop, used as a template to develop similar programs, or used as it is for computationally efficient sensitivity analyses in support of conservation planning.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.233 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological ApplicationsSame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207