MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2950301925 · doi:10.1126/science.aaw8529

Comment on “Global pattern of nest predation is disrupted by climate change in shorebirds”

2019· letter· en· W2950301925 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Bulla, Jeroen Reneerkens, Emily L. Weiser, Aleksandr Sokolov, Audrey R. Taylor, Benoît Sittler, Brian J. McCaffery, Daniel R. Ruthrauff, Daniel H. Catlin, David C. Payer, David H. Ward, Diana Solovyeva, Eduardo S. A. Santos, Eldar Rakhimberdiev, Erica Nol, Eunbi Kwon, Glen S. Brown, Glenda D. Hevia, H. River Gates, James A. Johnson, Jan A. van Gils, Jannik Hansen, Jean-François Lamarre, Jennie Rausch, Jesse R. Conklin, Joe Liebezeit, Joël Bêty, Johannes Lang, José A. Alves, Juan Fernández‐Elipe, Klaus‐Michael Exo, Loı̈c Bollache, Marcelo Bertellotti, Marie‐Andrée Giroux, Martijn van de Pol, Matthew D. Johnson, Megan L. Boldenow, Mihai Vâlcu, Mikhail Soloviev, Natalia Sokolova, Nathan R. Senner, Nicolas Lecomte, Nicolas Meyer, Niels Martin Schmidt, Olivier Gilg, Paul A. Smith, Paula Machín, Rebecca L. McGuire, Ricardo A. S. Cerboncini, Richard Ottvall, R.S.A. van Bemmelen, Rose J. Swift, Sarah T. Saalfeld, Sarah E. Jamieson, Stephen C. Brown, Theunis Piersma, Tomáš Albrecht, Verónica L. D’Amico, Richard B. Lanctot, Bart Kempenaers

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2019
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityCenter for Northern StudiesUniversité du Québec à RimouskiEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversité de MonctonMinistry of Natural Resources and ForestryTrent University
FundersMax-Planck-GesellschaftU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsPredationNest (protein structural motif)Climate changeArcticEcologyThe arcticGlobal warmingGeographyBiologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(Reports, 9 November 2018, p. 680) claim that climate change has disrupted patterns of nest predation in shorebirds. They report that predation rates have increased since the 1950s, especially in the Arctic. We describe methodological problems with their analyses and argue that there is no solid statistical support for their claims.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0480.037
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.012

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience→Same topicAvian ecology and behavior→French-language works237,207→