Imperfect detection biases extinction‐debt assessments
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Freshwater ecosystems have been substantially altered, threatening the survival and recovery of aquatic species at risk. Estimating the likelihood and magnitude of future extinctions (extinction debt; ED) is integral for conserving biodiversity and requires accurate species composition lists. Using species‐area relationships, we estimated ED for fishes in historically disturbed wetlands in the Lake Erie basin. Then, we used simulated data sets to assess how ED varied when species lists used to derive species‐area relationships had an increasing proportion of undetected species. When species lists were incomplete, ranging from 0.99 to 0.75, 15% fewer wetlands were estimated to have species in ED and, on average, 50% fewer species were expected to go extinct per wetland. Imperfect detection ultimately biased conservation prioritization among wetlands. Our findings suggest that if imperfect detection is not accounted for when projecting future extinctions, the severity of future species loss across a landscape, and the subsequent need for immediate restorative action, can be greatly underestimated.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it