MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3180122712 · doi:10.1098/rsif.2021.0257

Effects of stochasticity on the length and behaviour of ecological transients

2021· article· en· W3180122712 on OpenAlexaff
Alan Hastings, Karen C. Abbott, Kim Cuddington, Tessa B. Francis, Ying-Cheng Lai, Andrew Morozov, Sergei Petrovskii, Mary Lou Zeeman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Royal Society Interface · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcosystem dynamics and resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatistical physicsEcologyComputer scienceTransient (computer programming)Ecological systems theoryTheoretical ecologyStochastic processPhysicsMathematicsPopulationBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a growing recognition that ecological systems can spend extended periods of time far away from an asymptotic state, and that ecological understanding will therefore require a deeper appreciation for how long ecological transients arise. Recent work has defined classes of deterministic mechanisms that can lead to long transients. Given the ubiquity of stochasticity in ecological systems, a similar systematic treatment of transients that includes the influence of stochasticity is important. Stochasticity can of course promote the appearance of transient dynamics by preventing systems from settling permanently near their asymptotic state, but stochasticity also interacts with deterministic features to create qualitatively new dynamics. As such, stochasticity may shorten, extend or fundamentally change a system's transient dynamics. Here, we describe a general framework that is developing for understanding the range of possible outcomes when random processes impact the dynamics of ecological systems over realistic time scales. We emphasize that we can understand the ways in which stochasticity can either extend or reduce the lifetime of transients by studying the interactions between the stochastic and deterministic processes present, and we summarize both the current state of knowledge and avenues for future advances.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.604
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.205
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 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

Citations55
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Royal Society InterfaceSame topicEcosystem dynamics and resilienceFrench-language works237,207