MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092371372 · doi:10.1093/biosci/biaa088

The Ecology of Disturbance Interactions

2020· article· en· W3092371372 on OpenAlexafffund
Philip J. Burton, Anke Jentsch, Lawrence R. Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueBioScience · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcosystem dynamics and resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersElitenetzwerk BayernBayerische ForschungsallianzUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaUniversity of Nevada, Las Vegas
KeywordsDisturbance (geology)EcologyDependency (UML)EcosystemEnvironmental scienceCumulative effectsNatural (archaeology)Environmental resource managementGeographyComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Global change has been accompanied by recent increases in the frequency and intensity of various ecological disturbances (e.g., fires, floods, cyclones), both natural and anthropogenic in origin. Because these disturbances often interact, their cumulative and synergistic effects can result in unforeseen consequences, such as insect outbreaks, crop failure, and progressive ecosystem degradation. We consider the roles of biological legacies, thresholds, and lag effects responsible for the distinctive impacts of interacting disturbances. We propose a hierarchical classification that distinguishes the patterns and implications associated with random co-occurrences, individual links, and multiple links among disturbances that cascade in chains or networks. Disturbance-promoting interactions apparently prevail over disturbance-inhibiting ones. Complex and exogenous disturbance cascades are less predictable than simple and endogenous links because of their dependency on adjacent or synchronous events. These distinctions help define regional disturbance regimes and can have implications for natural selection, risk assessment, and options for management intervention.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations190
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioScienceSame topicEcosystem dynamics and resilienceFrench-language works237,207