MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2597625500 · doi:10.1139/as-2016-0038

The value of museums in the production, sharing, and use of entomological data to document hyperdiversity of the changing North

2017· article· en· W2597625500 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Derek S. Sikes, Matthew L. Bowser, Kathryn M. Daly, Toke T. Høye, Sarah Meierotto, Logan Mullen, Jozef Slowik, Jill Stockbridge

Bibliographic record

VenueArctic Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Arctic SciencesU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceAlaska Department of Fish and GameNational Park ServiceMassachusetts Department of Fish and GameNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDocumentationBiodiversityLatitudeBaseline (sea)Climate changeGeographyPopulationValue (mathematics)High latitudeProduction (economics)Distribution (mathematics)InvertebrateEcologyEnvironmental resource managementPhysical geographyBiologyComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceDemographySociologyFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

If the current rate of climate change continues, the composition, distribution, and relative population sizes of species in the higher latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere are likely to change considerably. Understanding the magnitude of this change requires a well- documented baseline against which to compare. Although specimen-less observations can help augment such a baseline for the minority of organisms that can be confidently identified in the field or from photographs, the vast majority of species are small-bodied invertebrates, primarily arthropods, that can only be identified from preserved specimens and (or) their tissues. Museum staff archive specimens and make them and their data available for research. This paper describes a number of challenges to the goal of thorough documentation of high-latitude arthropod biodiversity and their potential solutions. Examples are provided from ongoing and recently completed research that demonstrates the value of museum specimens and the sharing of their data via global portals like GBIF.org.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.010
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.011
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArctic ScienceSame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207