MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391466172 · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2024.01.004

Linking biodiversity, ecosystem function, and Nature’s contributions to people: a macroecological energy flux perspective

2024· article· en· W4391466172 on OpenAlexaff
Ana Carolina Antunes, Emilio Berti, Ulrich Brose, Myriam R. Hirt, Dirk Nikolaus Karger, Louise O’Connor, Laura J. Pollock, Wilfried Thuiller, Benoît Gauzens

Bibliographic record

VenueTrends in Ecology & Evolution · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftBiodiversa+
KeywordsEcosystemBiodiversityFlux (metallurgy)Vulnerability (computing)Ecosystem servicesEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceScale (ratio)Perspective (graphical)Climate changeMacroecologyEcologyGeographyComputer scienceBiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At macroecological scales, the provision of Nature's contributions to people (NCP) is mostly estimated with biophysical information, ignoring the ecological processes underlying them. This hinders our ability to properly quantify the impact of declining biodiversity and the provision of NCP. Here, we propose a framework that combines local-scale food web energy flux approaches and large-scale biodiversity models to evaluate ecosystem functions and flux-related NCP at extensive spatiotemporal scales. Importantly, this approach has the potential to upscale ecosystem functions, assess the vulnerability of flux-related NCP to the climate crisis, and support the development of multiscale mitigation policies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations27
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrends in Ecology & EvolutionSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207