MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089928363 · doi:10.3897/biss.4.59229

Conservation Implications of Taxonomic Intelligence: A case study of Trillium

2020· article· en· W3089928363 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anne Frances, Leah M. Oliver, Kathy Goodin

Bibliographic record

VenueBiodiversity Information Science and Standards · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotanical Studies and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTaxonomy (biology)Conservation statusTaxonomic rankBiologyGenusEcologyTaxonHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Taxonomy is integral to the conservation of species, yet the complexities associated with differing taxonomic perspectives present challenges to identifying the species most in need of conservation. The NatureServe Network maintains the most comprehensive data on rare plants and animals in the United States and Canada. Our central database maintains the taxonomic framework for over 80 member programs, requiring regular two-way data exchange. NatureServe's database actively manages different taxonomic concepts along with relevant downstream data such as conservation status and species occurrences. Here we present NatureServe's current process for maintaining taxonomic intelligence, and illustrate both challenges and successes in our approach. Through a case study of the genus Trillium , we also demonstrate how taxonomic intelligence is foundational to assigning conservation status. Trillium is a well known and widespread genus of spring wildflowers, some of which are used medicinally or ornamentally. We will focus on the Trillium pusillum complex, an active area of research, to show how taxonomic changes affect both conservation status and downstream data.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiodiversity Information Science and StandardsSame topicBotanical Studies and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207