MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2410770611 · doi:10.1111/ele.12617

<i>N‐</i>dimensional hypervolumes to study stability of complex ecosystems

2016· article· en· W2410770611 on OpenAlexaff
Ceres Barros, Wilfried Thuiller, Damien Georges, Isabelle Boulangeat, Tamara Münkemüller

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcosystem dynamics and resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
FundersSeventh Framework Programme
KeywordsEcologyEcosystemStability (learning theory)GeographyBiologyEnvironmental scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although our knowledge on the stabilising role of biodiversity and on how it is affected by perturbations has greatly improved, we still lack a comprehensive view on ecosystem stability that is transversal to different habitats and perturbations. Hence, we propose a framework that takes advantage of the multiplicity of components of an ecosystem and their contribution to stability. Ecosystem components can range from species or functional groups, to different functional traits, or even the cover of different habitats in a landscape mosaic. We make use of n-dimensional hypervolumes to define ecosystem states and assess how much they shift after environmental changes have occurred. We demonstrate the value of this framework with a study case on the effects of environmental change on Alpine ecosystems. Our results highlight the importance of a multidimensional approach when studying ecosystem stability and show that our framework is flexible enough to be applied to different types of ecosystem components, which can have important implications for the study of ecosystem stability and transient dynamics.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations56
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology LettersSame topicEcosystem dynamics and resilienceFrench-language works237,207