Multiscale codependence analysis: an integrated approach to analyze relationships across scales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The spatial and temporal organization of ecological processes and features and the scales at which they occur are central topics to landscape ecology and metapopulation dynamics, and increasingly regarded as a cornerstone paradigm for understanding ecological processes. Hence, there is need for computational approaches which allow the identification of the proper spatial or temporal scales of ecological processes and the explicit integration of that information in models. For that purpose, we propose a new method (multiscale codependence analysis, MCA) to test the statistical significance of the correlations between two variables at particular spatial or temporal scales. Validation of the method (using Monte Carlo simulations) included the study of type I error rate, under five statistical significance thresholds, and of type II error rate and statistical power. The method was found to be valid, in terms of type I error rate, and to have sufficient statistical power to be useful in practice. MCA has assumptions that are met in a wide range of circumstances. When applied to model the river habitat of juvenile Atlantic salmon, MCA revealed that variables describing substrate composition of the river bed were the most influential predictors of parr abundance at 0.4-4.1 km scales whereas mean channel depth was more influential at 200-300 m scales. When properly assessed, the spatial structuring observed in nature may be used purposefully to refine our understanding of natural processes and enhance model representativeness.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".