MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2738559501 · doi:10.1002/ecs2.1896

Detect and exploit hidden structure in fatty acid signature data

2017· article· en· W2738559501 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey F. Bromaghin, Suzanne M. Budge, Gregory W. Thiemann

Bibliographic record

VenueEcosphere · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityDalhousie University
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
KeywordsSignature (topology)ExploitCluster analysisMultivariate statisticsPredationBiologyOrdinationComputer scienceEcologyPattern recognition (psychology)Data miningArtificial intelligenceMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Estimates of predator diet composition are essential to our understanding of their ecology. Although several methods of estimating diet are practiced, methods based on biomarkers have become increasingly common. Quantitative fatty acid signature analysis ( QFASA ) is a popular method that continues to be refined and extended. Quantitative fatty acid signature analysis is based on differences in the signatures of prey types, often species, which are recognized and designated by investigators. Similarly, predator signatures may be structured by known factors such as sex or age class, and the season or region of sample collection. The recognized structure in signature data inherently influences QFASA results in important and typically beneficial ways. However, predator and prey signatures may contain additional, hidden structure that investigators either choose not to incorporate into an analysis or of which they are unaware, being caused by unknown ecological mechanisms. Hidden structure also influences QFASA results, most often negatively. We developed a new method to explore signature data for hidden structure, called divisive magnetic clustering ( DIMAC ). Our DIMAC approach is based on the same distance measure used in diet estimation, closely linking methods of data exploration and parameter estimation, and it does not require data transformation or distributional assumptions, as do many multivariate ordination methods in common use. We investigated the potential benefits of the DIMAC method to detect and subsequently exploit hidden structure in signature data using two prey signature libraries with quite different characteristics. We found that the existence of hidden structure in prey signatures can increase the confusion between prey types and thereby reduce the accuracy and precision of QFASA diet estimates. Conversely, the detection and exploitation of hidden structure represent a potential opportunity to improve predator diet estimates and may lead to new insights into the ecology of either predator or prey. The DIMAC algorithm is implemented in the R diet estimation package qfasar.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcosphereSame topicIsotope Analysis in EcologyFrench-language works237,207