MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095562325 · doi:10.1126/science.1094858

Challenges of Modeling Ocean Basin Ecosystems

2004· review· en· W2095562325 on OpenAlexaff
Brad deYoung, Francisco E. Werner, Fei Chai, Bernard A. Megrey, P. Monfray

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrophic levelFood webZooplanktonEcosystemEnvironmental scienceMarine ecosystemEcologyBiogeochemical cycleAbundance (ecology)Trophic cascadeStructural basinOceanographyFisheryBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With increasing pressure for a more ecological approach to marine fisheries and environmental management, there is a growing need to understand and predict changes in marine ecosystems. Biogeochemical and physical oceanographic models are well developed, but extending these further up the food web to include zooplankton and fish is a major challenge. The difficulty arises because organisms at higher trophic levels are longer lived, with important variability in abundance and distribution at basin and decadal scales. Those organisms at higher trophic levels also have complex life histories compared to microbes, further complicating their coupling to lower trophic levels and the physical system. We discuss a strategy that builds on recent advances in modeling and observations and suggest a way forward that includes approaches to coupling across trophic levels and the inclusion of uncertainty.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations209
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207