MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386712670 · doi:10.1111/ecog.06731

Addressing uncertainty when projecting marine species' distributions under climate change

2023· article· en· W4386712670 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah C. Davies, Patrick L. Thompson, Catalina Gómez, Jessica Nephin, Anders Knudby, Ashley E. Park, Sarah K. Friesen, Laura J. Pollock, Emily Rubidge, Sean C. Anderson, Josephine C. Iacarella, Devin A. Lyons, A. Andrew M. MacDonald, Andrew McMillan, Eric J. Ward, Amber M. Holdsworth, Neil C. Swart, Jeff Price, Karen L. Hunter

Bibliographic record

VenueEcography · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of OttawaBedford Institute of OceanographyMcGill UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersFisheries and Oceans Canada
KeywordsClimate changeEnvironmental resource managementSpecies distributionResource (disambiguation)Marine conservationMarine ecosystemProcess (computing)EcosystemEcologyPresentation (obstetrics)Computer scienceEnvironmental scienceHabitatBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Species distribution models (SDMs) have been widely used to project terrestrial species' responses to climate change and are increasingly being used for similar objectives in the marine realm. These projections are critically needed to develop strategies for resource management and the conservation of marine ecosystems. SDMs are a powerful and necessary tool; however, they are subject to many sources of uncertainty, both quantifiable and unquantifiable. To ensure that SDM projections are informative for management and conservation decisions, sources of uncertainty must be considered and properly addressed. Here we provide ten overarching guidelines that will aid researchers to identify, minimize, and account for uncertainty through the entire model development process, from the formation of a study question to the presentation of results. These guidelines focus on correlative models and were developed at an international workshop attended by over 50 researchers and practitioners. Although our guidelines are broadly applicable across biological realms, we provide particular focus to the challenges and uncertainties associated with projecting the impacts of climate change on marine species and ecosystems.

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.137
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.137
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations29
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcographySame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207