MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288843383 · doi:10.2495/eco030111

The Use Of Taxonomic Diversity Indices In The Assessment OfPerturbed Community Recovery

2003· article· en· W2288843383 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rachelle E. Desrochers, Madhur Anand

Bibliographic record

VenueWIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntropy (arrow of time)EcologyGamma diversitySpecies diversityDiversity indexMathematicsTaxonomic rankAlpha diversitySpecies richnessBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spatial dynamics of ecological diversity are studied in two regions (Sudbury, Canada and Harjavalta, Finland) damaged by air pollution from copper and nickel smelting. Perturbation from pollution is assumed to be most intense near the source and to decrease with distance. Monitoring sites were therefore selected to traverse these pollution gradients. Using Rhyi's generalized entropy as a measure of diversity, a monotonic pattern of increasing diversity is discovered at the recovering Canadian sites but not at the Finnish sites. Quadratic entropy and a related information-theoretical measure of taxonomic diversity, taxonomic entropy, were calculated in the hope that these diversity indices, which incorporate taxonomic distances, would provide a better understanding of these unexpected results. Quadratic entropy has the additional advantage of making use of pairwise taxonomic distances between species in a highly intuitive manner. Taxonomic has a clear information-theoretical meaning and can be calculated in the same units of measurement as Rknyi's generalized entropy thereby facilitating the comparison of classical diversity to taxonomic diversity. Quadratic entropy was found to contribute little insight as to the state of ecological recovery relative to taxonomic entropy.

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)0.010
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWIT Transactions on Ecology and the EnvironmentSame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207