A common framework for identifying linkage rules across different types of interactions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Species interactions, ranging from antagonisms to mutualisms, form the architecture of biodiversity and determine ecosystem functioning. Understanding the rules responsible for who interacts with whom, as well as the functional consequences of these interspecific interactions, is central to predict community dynamics and stability. Species traits sensu lato may affect different ecological processes by determining species interactions through a two‐step process. First, ecological and life‐history traits govern species distributions and abundance, and hence determine species co‐occurrence and the potential for species to interact. Secondly, morphological or physiological traits between co‐occurring potential interaction partners should match for the realization of an interaction. Here, we review recent advances on predicting interactions from species co‐occurrence and develop a probabilistic model for inferring trait matching. The models proposed here integrate both neutral and trait‐matching constraints, while using only information about known interactions, thereby overcoming problems originating from undersampling of rare interactions (i.e. missing links). They can easily accommodate qualitative or quantitative data and can incorporate trait variation within species, such as values that vary along developmental stages or environmental gradients. We use three case studies to show that the proposed models can detect strong trait matching (e.g. predator–prey system), relaxed trait matching (e.g. herbivore–plant system) and barrier trait matching (e.g. plant–pollinator systems). Only by elucidating which species traits are important in each process (i.e. in determining interaction establishment and frequency), we can advance in explaining how species interact and the consequences of these interactions for ecosystem functioning. A lay summary is available for this article.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 it