Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evaluation of the ecological status of river sites in Canada is supported by building models using the reference condition approach. However, geography, data scarcity and inter-operability constraints have frustrated attempts to monitor national-scale status and trends. This issue is particularly true in Atlantic Canada, where no ecological assessment system is currently available. Here, we present a reference condition model based on the River Invertebrate Prediction and Classification System approach with regional-scale applicability. To achieve this, we used biological monitoring data collected from wadeable streams across Atlantic Canada together with freely available, nationally consistent geographic information system (GIS) environmental data layers. For the first time, we demonstrated that it is possible to use data generated from different studies, even when collected using different sampling methods, to generate a robust predictive model. This model was successfully generated and tested using GIS-based rather than local habitat variables and showed improved performance when compared to a null model. In addition, ecological quality ratio data derived from the model responded to observed stressors in a test dataset. Implications for future large-scale implementation of river biomonitoring using a standardised approach with global application are presented.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".