MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3039785469 · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.13444

<scp>geoorigins</scp>: A new method and<scp>r</scp>package for trait mapping and geographic provenancing of specimens without categorical constraints

2020· article· en· W3039785469 on OpenAlexaff
Ardern Hulme‐Beaman, Anna Rudzinski, Joseph E. J. Cooper, Robert F. Lachlan, Keith Dobney, Mark Thomas

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in Ecology and Evolution · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersMarie CurieLeverhulme TrustWellcome TrustWellcome
KeywordsProvenanceTraitCategorical variableIdentification (biology)Spatial analysisGeographic information systemEvolutionary biologyRange (aeronautics)BiologyCartographyGeographyData miningComputer scienceEcologyPaleontologyMachine learningRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Biologists often seek to geographically provenance organisms using their traits. This is typically achieved by defining spatial groups using distinct patterns of trait variation. Here, we present a new spatial provenancing and trait boundary identification methodology, based on correlations between geographic and trait distances that require no a priori group assumptions. We apply this to three datasets where spatial provenance is sought: morphological rat and vole dentition data (human commensal translocation datasets); and birdsong data (cultural transmission dataset). We also present the results of cross‐validation testing. Spatial provenancing is possible with differing degrees of accuracy for each dataset, with birdsong providing the most accurate geographic origin (identifying an average spatial region of 0.22 km 2 as the area of origin with 99.9% confidence). Our method has a wide range of potential applications to diverse data types—including phenotypic, genetic and cultural—to identify trait boundaries and spatially provenance the origin of unknown or translocated specimens where trait differences are geographically structured and correlated with spatial separation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.710

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in Ecology and EvolutionSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207