MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2299913676

Artificial intelligence based decision support for trumpeter swan management

2002· dissertation· en· W2299913676 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Denis J. Dean, Richard S. Sojda

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlywayWaterfowlContext (archaeology)GeographyPopulationDecision support systemEcologyHabitatEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceEnvironmental scienceBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of trumpeter swans (Cygnus buccinator ) breeding in the Tri-State area where Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming come together has declined to just a few hundred pairs. However, these birds are part of the Rocky Mountain Population which additionally has over 3,500 birds breeding in Alberta, British Columbia, Northwest Territories, and Yukon Territory. To a large degree, these birds seem to have abandoned traditional migratory pathways in the flyway. Waterfowl managers have been interested in decision support tools that would help them explore simulated management scenarios in their quest towards reaching population recovery and the reestablishment of traditional migratory pathways. I have developed a decision support system to assist biologists with such management, especially related to wetland ecology. Decision support systems use a combination of models, analytical techniques, and information retrieval to help develop and evaluate appropriate alternatives. Swan management is a domain that is ecologically complex, and this complexity is compounded by spatial and temporal issues. As such, swan management is an inherently distributed problem. Therefore, the ecological context for modeling swan movements in response to management actions was built as a multiagent system of interacting intelligent agents that implements a queuing model representing swan migration. These agents accessed ecological knowledge about swans, their habitats, and flyway management principles from three independent expert systems. The agents were autonomous, had some sensory capability, and could respond to changing conditions. A key problem when developing ecological decision support systems is empirically determining that the recommendations provided are valid. Because Rocky Mountain trumpeter swans have been surveyed for a long period of time, I was able to compare simulated distributions provided by the system with actual field observations across 20 areas for the period 1988–2000. Applying the Matched Pairs Multivariate Permutation Test as a statistical tool was a new approach for comparing flyway distributions of waterfowl over time that seemed to work well. Based on this approach, the empirical evidence that I gathered led me to conclude that the base queuing model does accurately simulate swan distributions in the flyway. The system was insensitive to almost all model parameters tested. That remains perplexing, but might result from the base queuing model, itself, being particularly effective at representing the actual ecological diversity in the world of Rocky Mountain trumpeter swans, both spatial and temporally. The Distributed Environment Centered Agent Framework (DECAF) was successful at integrating communications among agents, integrating ecological knowledge, and simulating swan distributions through implementation of a queuing system. The work I have conducted indicates a need for determining what other factors might allow a deeper understanding of the effects of management actions on the flyway distribution of waterfowl. Knowing those would allow the more refined development of algorithms for effective decision support systems via collaboration by intelligent agents. Additional, specific conclusions and ideas for future research related both to waterfowl ecology and to the use of multiagent systems have been triggered by the validation work.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change→French-language works237,207→