MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037366647 · doi:10.3390/ijgi9070414

A Generalized Linear Mixed Model Approach to Assess Emerald Ash Borer Diffusion

2020· article· en· W3037366647 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Yuan Zhong, Baoxin Hu, G. Brent Hall, Farah Hoque, Wei Xu, Xin Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsEsri (Canada)Public Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Food Inspection Agency
KeywordsEmerald ash borerAgrilusFraxinusGeneralized linear mixed modelGeneralized linear modelGeneralized additive modelAutocorrelationStatisticsGeographyEcologyEconometricsEnvironmental scienceMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Asian Emerald Ash Borer beetle (EAB, Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire) can cause damage to all species of Ash trees (Fraxinus), and rampant, unchecked infestations of this insect can cause significant damage to forests. It is thus critical to assess and model the spread of the EAB in a manner that allows authorities to anticipate likely areas of future tree infestation. In this study, a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM), combining the features of the commonly used generalized linear model (GLM) and a random effects model, was developed to predict future EAB spread patterns in Southern Ontario, Canada. The GLMM was designed to deal with autocorrelation in the data. Two random effects were established based on the geographic information provided with the EAB data, and a method based on statistical inference was proposed to identify the most significant factors associated with the distribution of the EAB. The results of the model showed that 95% of the testing data were correctly classified. The predictive performance of the GLMM was substantially enhanced in comparison with that obtained by the GLM. The influence of climatic factors, such as wind speed and anthropogenic activities, had the most significant influence on the spread of the EAB.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS International Journal of Geo-InformationSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207