MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797202925 · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.13010

Fuzzy ecospace modelling

2018· article· en· W2797202925 on OpenAlex
Daniel Dick, Marc Laflamme

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in Ecology and Evolution · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainability and Ecological Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsOutlierStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Quantitative ecospace models are a numerical approach to comparing the functional structure of different ecosystems on macroevolutionary time‐scales, by quantifying the distribution of functional ecological traits. Ecospace modelling has historically been restricted to a combination of visual interpretation and quantification via metrics such as mean sum of ranges. We argue that comparing ecosystem function in this way overlooks critical information about degrees of overlap and redundancy, and potentially misrepresents the role of “empty ecospace” in driving macroevolution. Fuzzy ecospace modelling ( FEM ) places conventional ecospace modelling within a fuzzy set‐theoretic framework, wherein functional groups are learned from the dataset, creating models which are sensitive to overlap and the role of empty ecospace. Fuzzy ecospace modelling is a machine learning program which quantifies functional ecological similarity, and uses this information to classify new taxa. It creates functional groups using a Gower dissimilarity coefficient‐based approach to the k ‐medoids algorithm, and uses fuzzy discriminant analysis to classify the taxa present in another ecosystem into these clusters, based on minimal Gower dissimilarity with a fuzzy threshold. This has the effect of quantifying the similarity between these ecosystems in terms of their functional groups, accounting for total redundancy, partial redundancy/novelty and total novelty. By using fuzzy membership functions, FEM can classify taxa which are highly ecologically dissimilar (outliers with respect to all functional groups), taxa which are fully redundant (100% similarity to those in a given functional group) and taxa in‐between, which represent degrees of niche overlap. This can be used to compare the functional groups present in different ecosystems (as well as their degrees of overlap), and as a metric approach to comparing total ecological disparity. These results can be used to test models of the role of empty ecospace in macroevolutionary trends, or to investigate how ecosystems respond to global perturbations. Furthermore, it allows us to define numerically the concept of empty ecospace for n ‐dimensional datasets. A cluster‐based approach to the quantification of ecospace allows for a numerical estimate of niche overlap, a value particularly difficult to quantify in fossil contexts.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.663

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.299 · 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