MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066814542 · doi:10.1139/a09-007

Towards an integrated approach to modelling the risks and impacts of invasive forest species

2009· article· en· W2066814542 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Denys Yemshanov, Daniel W. McKenney, John Pedlar, Frank Koch, David Cook

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemporal scalesInvasive speciesEcologyEnvironmental resource managementComponent (thermodynamics)Spatial ecologyScale (ratio)Introduced speciesGeographyEnvironmental scienceBiologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we provide an overview of an integrated approach to modelling the risks and impacts associated with non-indigenous forest pest species. This is a broad and important topic given the scale of ecological and economic consequences associated with non-indigenous species in North America and elsewhere. Assessments of risks and impacts remain difficult due to complexities and interactions between the many factors driving invasions and outcomes. These processes occur across various spatial and temporal scales, and are often influenced and complicated by human activities. For each component of an ecological invasion (i.e., arrival, establishment, and spread), we review general approaches for modelling the phenomenon and identify data and knowledge gaps. With the greater availability of various spatial data and computational power we suggest the possibility of linking the models for each invasion component into a more integrated framework, thus allowing interactions and feedbacks between components to be better incorporated into risk modelling efforts. The approach is illustrated using examples from current work with Sirex noctilio Fabricius — a relatively new invasive wood wasp in eastern North America.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.670
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations33
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207