Simulating multi-scale optimization and variable selection in species distribution modeling
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Species distribution modeling (SDM) is a fundamental tool in theoretical and applied ecology. However, relatively little is known about the performance of different approaches for scale optimization, model selection, and algorithmic prediction in the context of nonlinear, multiscale and interactive relationships between environmental variables and species occurrence. Modelers often struggle to optimize a tradeoff between ecological relevance, model robustness, complexity, and overfitting. In this paper, we investigated several methods designed to optimize spatial scale and variable selection in SDMs, in each case evaluating model fitness, parsimony and predictive performance. We used a simulation approach to produce a large pool of alternative underlying habitat relationships that reflect a broad range of realistic habitat associations. We also compared several different modeling algorithms, including logistic regression with a generalized linear model (GLM), Lasso and Elastic-Net Regularized GLMs (GLMNet), and random forest (RF), as well as alternative variable and scale selection methods. We found that GLM methods employing all-subsets dredge routines for variable selection were consistently the best predictors based on all criteria of our model performance assessment and across all attributes of the simulated underlying relationship, including nonlinearity and interaction. We had expected machine learning approaches, such as random forest, to perform better in these more complex forms of species-environment relationships. GLM using dredge variable selection was also the method that included the fewest spurious covariates and included the most correct predictors as a proportion of all predictors. We found that univariate scaling was the most robust method of variable and scale selection, along with Minimal Redundancy Maximal Relevancy (MRMR) which performed equivalently. The simulation experiment presented here provides a robust assessment of simulated multi-species distribution model performance, complexity and fidelity. By simulating a large range of potential habitat relationships with varying spatial scale, effect sizes, linearity, and interactions, we comprehensively evaluated model performance across gradients of complexity of the underlying relationships and violations of classical statistical assumptions. This study provides a valuable assessment and a broader example of the power and utility of controlled simulation experiments in habitat relationships and other ecological spatial predictive modeling. • Scale optimization, model selection, and algorithmic prediction in the context of nonlinear, multiscale and interactive relationships between environmental variables and species occurrence. • We used a simulation experiment to investigate spatial scale and variable selection in SDMs. • We found that GLM methods employing all-subsets dredge routines for variable selection were consistently the best. • GLM methods using dredge variable selection were also the methods that included the fewest spurious covariates and included the most correct predictors as a proportion of all predictors. • We found that univariate scaling was the most robust method of variable and scale selection, along with Minimal Redundancy Maximal Relevancy (MRMR).
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.009 | 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 it