The Role of Spatial Aggregation in Forensic Entomology: Table 1.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A central concept in forensic entomology is that arthropod succession on carrion is predictable and can be used to estimate the postmortem interval (PMI) of human remains. However, most studies have reported significant variation in successional patterns, particularly among replicate carcasses, which has complicated estimates of PMIs. Several forensic entomology researchers have proposed that further integration of ecological and evolutionary theory in forensic entomology could help advance the application of succession data for producing PMI estimates. The purpose of this essay is to draw attention to the role of spatial aggregation of arthropods among carrion resources as a potentially important aspect to consider for understanding and predicting the assembly of arthropods on carrion over time. We review ecological literature related to spatial aggregation of arthropods among patchy and ephemeral resources, such as carrion, and when possible integrate these results with published forensic literature. We show that spatial aggregation of arthropods across resources is commonly reported and has been used to provide fundamental insight for understanding regional and local patterns of arthropod diversity and coexistence. Moreover, two suggestions are made for conducting future research. First, because intraspecific aggregation affects species frequency distributions across carcasses, data from replicate carcasses should not be combined, but rather statistically quantified to generate occurrence probabilities. Second, we identify a need for studies that tease apart the degree to which community assembly on carrion is spatially versus temporally structured, which will aid in developing mechanistic hypotheses on the ecological factors shaping community assembly on carcasses.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".