MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300082144 · doi:10.3389/fenvs.2022.958596

Using Bayesian networks to map winter habitat for mountain goats in coastal British Columbia, Canada

2022· article· en· W4300082144 on OpenAlexaffabout
Steven F. Wilson, Cliff Nietvelt, Shawn D. Taylor, Daniel A. Guertin

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Environmental Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsYukon Department of EnvironmentGovernment of British ColumbiaVancouver Island University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHabitatEcologyGeographyTerrainPhysical geographyWildlifeAbundance (ecology)SnowElevation (ballistics)Climate changeEnvironmental scienceCartographyBiologyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mountain goat ( Oreamnos americanus ) is an iconic wildlife species of western North America that inhabits steep and largely inaccessible terrain in remote areas. They are at risk from human disturbance, genetic isolation, climate change, and a variety of other stressors. Managing populations is challenging and mountain goats are particularly difficult and expensive to inventory. As a result, biologists often rely on models to estimate the species’ abundance and distribution in remote areas. We used landscape characteristics evident at point locations of mountain goat visual observations, tracks, and telemetry locations, along with random locations, to learn the structure and parameters of a Bayesian network that predicted the suitability of habitats for mountain goats. We then used the model to map habitat suitability across 285,000 km 2 of potential habitat in mountain ranges of the south and central Canadian Pacific coast. Steep slopes, forest cover characteristics, and snow depth were the important drivers. Modeling the system as a Bayesian network provided several advantages over more common regression methods because input variables were heterogenous (i.e., a mix of discrete and continuous), autocorrelated, and animals exhibited non-linear responses to landscape conditions. These common characteristics of ecological data routinely violate the assumptions of parametric linear models, which are commonly used to map habitat suitability from animal observations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.195 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Environmental ScienceSame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207