The influence of artificial light on stream and riparian ecosystems: questions, challenges, and perspectives
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
Artificial light at night is gaining attention for its potential to alter ecosystems. Although terrestrial ecologists have observed that artificial light at night may disrupt migrations, feeding, and other important ecological functions, we know comparatively little about the role artificial light might play in disrupting freshwater and riparian ecosystems. We identify and discuss four future research domains that artificial light may influence in freshwater and associated terrestrial ecosystems, with an emphasis on running waters: (1) dispersal, (2) population genetics and evolution, (3) ecosystem functioning, and (4) potential interactions with other stressors. We suggest that future experimental and modeling studies should focus on the effects of different spectral emissions by different light sources on freshwater organisms, the spatial and temporal scale over which artificial light acts, and the magnitude of change in light at night across the landscape relative to the distribution of running and standing waters. Improved knowledge about the effects of artificial light on freshwater ecosystems will inform policy decisions about changes to artificial light spectral emissions and distributions.
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) | 0.000 | 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