MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068550853 · doi:10.1029/2011eo060004

Integrating Paleoecological Databases

2011· article· en· W2068550853 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica L. Blois, Simon Goring, Alison J. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueEos · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaleoecologyDatabaseEcologyGeographyBiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neotoma Consortium Workshop; Madison, Wisconsin, 23–26 September 2010 ; Paleoecology can contribute much to global change science, as paleontological records provide rich information about species range shifts, changes in vegetation composition and productivity, aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem responses to abrupt climate change, and paleoclimate reconstruction, for example. However, while paleoecology is increasingly a multidisciplinary, multiproxy field focused on biotic responses to global change, most paleo databases focus on single‐proxy groups. The Neotoma Paleoecology Database ( http://www.neotomadb.org ) aims to remedy this limitation by integrating discipline‐specific databases to facilitate cross‐community queries and analyses. In September, Neotoma consortium members and representatives from other databases and data communities met at the University of Wisconsin‐Madison to launch the second development phase of Neotoma. The workshop brought together 54 international specialists, including Neotoma data stewards, users, and developers. Goals for the meeting were fourfold: (1) develop working plans for existing data communities; (2) identify new data types and sources; (3) enhance data access, visualization, and analysis on the Neotoma Web site; and (4) coordinate with other databases and cooperate in tool development and sharing.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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)0.4350.005

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.156 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEosSame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207