MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125731809 · doi:10.1002/ieam.129

Toward a knowledge infrastructure for traits-based ecological risk assessment

2010· article· en· W2125731809 on OpenAlexaff
Donald J. Baird, Christopher J. O. Baker, Robert B. Brua, Mehrdad Hajibabaei, Kearon McNicol, Timothy Pascoe, Dick de Zwart

Bibliographic record

VenueIntegrated Environmental Assessment and Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsImpactEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of GuelphUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraitData scienceSemantic WebMetadataLeverage (statistics)Computer scienceConstruct (python library)Process (computing)Field (mathematics)Knowledge managementWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The trait approach has already indicated significant potential as a tool in understanding natural variation among species in sensitivity to contaminants in the process of ecological risk assessment. However, to realize its full potential, a defined nomenclature for traits is urgently required, and significant effort is required to populate databases of species-trait relationships. Recently, there have been significant advances in the area of information management and discovery in the area of the semantic web. Combined with continuing progress in biological trait knowledge, these suggest that the time is right for a reevaluation of how trait information from divergent research traditions is collated and made available for end users in the field of environmental management. Although there has already been a great deal of work on traits, the information is scattered throughout databases, literature, and undiscovered sources. Further progress will require better leverage of this existing data and research to fill in the gaps. We review and discuss a number of technical and social challenges to bringing together existing information and moving toward a new, collaborative approach. Finally, we outline a path toward enhanced knowledge discovery within the traits domain space, showing that, by linking knowledge management infrastructure, semantic metadata (trait ontologies), and Web 2.0 and 3.0 technologies, we can begin to construct a dedicated platform for TERA science.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0140.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0110.022
Open science0.0050.007
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
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

Citations69
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntegrated Environmental Assessment and ManagementSame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207