Biodiversity Observations Miner: A web application to unlock primary biodiversity data from published literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A considerable portion of primary biodiversity data is digitally locked inside published literature which is often stored as pdf files. Large-scale approaches to biodiversity science could benefit from retrieving this information and making it digitally accessible and machine-readable. Nonetheless, the amount and diversity of digitally published literature pose many challenges for knowledge discovery and retrieval. Text mining has been extensively used for data discovery tasks in large quantities of documents. However, text mining approaches for knowledge discovery and retrieval have been limited in biodiversity science compared to other disciplines. NEW INFORMATION: This web application, written in R, allows the semi-automated discovery of punctual biodiversity observations (e.g. biotic interactions, functional or behavioural traits and natural history descriptions) associated with the scientific names present inside a corpus of scientific literature. Furthermore, BOM enable users the rapid screening of large quantities of literature based on word co-occurrences that match custom biodiversity dictionaries. This tool aims to increase the digital mobilisation of primary biodiversity data and is freely accessible via GitHub or through a web server.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.026 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".