Linking the ball‐and‐cup analogy and ordination trajectories to describe ecosystem stability, resistance, and resilience
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The ball‐and‐cup diagram for conceptualizing ecosystem stability, resistance, and resilience is often presented as a ball rolling around within and between two or more cups. This analogy has a long history in ecology and has been used to illustrate ecosystem changes over time where the magnitude of changes required to push the ball from one cup to another represents a regime shift to an alternative state. Another approach for visualizing ecosystem stability, resistance, and resilience involves ordinations of repeated measures of community data or environmental variables and tracking trajectories over time in ordination space. Interestingly, the two approaches have not been linked in a meaningful way. Here, we provide a conceptual link between trajectories of ecological change in ordination space to the ball‐and‐cup analogy and show how distance‐based measures calculated from ordination scores can be used to quantitatively classify and evaluate the relative stability and resilience of ecological systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it