Bridging parametric and nonparametric measures of species interactions unveils new insights of non-equilibrium dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A central theme in ecological research is to understand how species interactions contribute to community dynamics. Species interactions are the basis of parametric (model-driven) and nonpara-metric (model-free) approaches in theoretical and empirical work. However, despite their different interpretations across these approaches, these measures have occasionally been used interchangeably, limiting our opportunity to use their differences to gain new insights about ecological systems. Here, we revisit two of the most used measures across these approaches: species interactions measured as constant direct effects (typically used in parametric approaches) and local aggregated effects (typically used in nonparametric approaches). We show two fundamental properties of species interactions that cannot be revealed without bridging these definitions. First, we show that the local aggregated intraspecific effect summarizes all potential pathways through which one species impacts itself, which are likely to be negative even without any constant direct self-regulation mechanism. This property has implications for the long-held debate on how communities can be stabilized when little evidence of self-regulation has been found among higher-trophic species. Second, we show that a local aggregated interspecific effect between two species is correlated with the constant direct interspecific effect if and only if the population dynamics do not have any higher-order direct effects. This other property provides a rigorous methodology to detect direct higher-order effects in the field and experimental data. Overall, our findings illustrate a practical route to gain further insights about non-equilibrium ecological dynamics and species interactions.
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 | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".