Spatial Fingerprinting: Horizontal Fusion of Multi-Dimensional Bio-Tracers as Solution to Global Food Provenance Problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Building the capacity of efficiently determining the provenance of food products represents a crucial step towards the sustainability of the global food system. Despite species specific empirical examples of multi-tracer approaches to provenance, the precise benefit and efficacy of multi-tracers remains poorly understood. Here we show why, and when, data fusion of bio-tracers is an extremely powerful technique for geographical provenance discrimination. Specifically, we show using extensive simulations how, and under what conditions, geographical relationships between bio-tracers (e.g., spatial covariance) can act like a spatial fingerprint, in many naturally occurring applications likely allowing rapid identification with limited data. To highlight the theory, we outline several statistic methodologies, including artificial intelligence, and apply these methodologies as a proof of concept to a limited data set of 90 individuals of highly mobile Sockeye salmon that originate from 3 different areas. Using 17 measured bio-tracers, we demonstrate that increasing combined bio-tracers results in stronger discriminatory power. We argue such applications likely even work for such highly mobile and critical fisheries as tuna.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".