The cumulative niche approach: A framework to assess the performance of ecological niche model projections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ecological Niche Models (ENMs) are often used to project species distributions within alien ranges and in future climatic scenarios. However, ENMs depend on species-environment equilibrium, which may be absent for actively expanding species. We present a novel framework to estimate whether species have reached environmental equilibrium in their native and alien ranges. The method is based on the estimation of niche breadth with the accumulation of species occurrences. An asymptote will indicate exhaustive knowledge of the realised niches. We demonstrate the CNA framework for 26 species of mammals, amphibians, and birds. Possible outcomes of the framework include: (1) There is enough data to quantify the native and alien realised niches, allowing us to calculate niche expansion between the native and alien ranges, also indicating that ENMs can be reliably projected to new environmental conditions. (2) The data in the native range is not adequate but an asymptote is reached in the alien realised niche, indicating low confidence in our ability to evaluate niche expansion in the alien range but high confidence in model projections to new environmental conditions within the alien range. (3) There is enough data to quantify the native realised niche, but not enough knowledge about the alien realised niche, hindering the reliability of projections beyond sampled conditions. (4) Both the native and alien ranges do not reach an asymptote, and thus few robust conclusions about the species' niche or future projections can be made. Our framework can be used to detect species' environmental equilibrium in both the native and alien ranges, to quantify changes in the realised niche during the invasion processes, and to estimate the likely accuracy of model projections to new environmental conditions.
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 | 0.022 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".