Adaptation and Response in Drylands (ARID): Community Insights for Scoping a NASA Terrestrial Ecology Field Campaign in Drylands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Dryland ecosystems cover 40% of our planet's land surface, support billions of people, and are responding rapidly to climate and land use change. These expansive systems also dominate core aspects of Earth's climate, storing and exchanging vast amounts of water, carbon, and energy with the atmosphere. Despite their indispensable ecosystem services and high vulnerability to change, drylands are one of the least understood ecosystem types, partly due to challenges studying their heterogeneous landscapes and misconceptions that drylands are unproductive “wastelands.” Consequently, inadequate understanding of dryland processes has resulted in poor model representation and forecasting capacity, hindering decision making for these at‐risk ecosystems. NASA satellite resources are increasingly available at the higher resolutions needed to enhance understanding of drylands' heterogeneous spatiotemporal dynamics. NASA's Terrestrial Ecology Program solicited proposals for scoping a multi‐year field campaign, of which Adaptation and Response in Drylands (ARID) was one of two scoping studies selected. A primary goal of the scoping study is to gather input from the scientific and data end‐user communities on dryland research gaps and data user needs. Here, we provide an overview of the ARID team's community engagement and how it has guided development of our framework. This includes an ARID kickoff meeting with over 300 participants held in October 2023 at the University of Arizona to gather input from data end‐users and scientists. We also summarize insights gained from hundreds of follow‐up activities, including from a tribal‐engagement focused workshop in New Mexico, conference town halls, intensive roundtables, and international engagements.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".