Tracking over 30 years of coral reef infrastructure degradation in Barbados
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coral reefs face escalating threats from global and local stressors, and these challenges are exacerbated in the Caribbean. This study focuses on coral reef structure in Barbados, where a previous study documented reef degradation in the 1990s. As 30 years have passed, we examined the rate of change of reef structure and quantified associated substrate presence along the western reefs of Barbados. Using satellite and geotagged imagery, we analyzed 19 reef structures over the interval 2013 to 2023 along the west coast of Barbados, comparing them to the previous study’s findings in 1950 and 1991. We ground-truthed five sites previously categorized as highly degraded reefs to confirm their structural integrity and substrate-type. Results confirmed ongoing reef structural loss, averaging ~ 137.68 m 1 annually across all sites. We identified four primary substrate types: coral, algae-covered substrate, rubble, and sand, with algae-covered substrate predominating and projected to persist. Our results underscore the urgency of monitoring reef health and highlight the potential limitations of satellite assessment. This research enhances understanding of reef dynamics and offers a framework for identifying vulnerable areas, which are crucial for effective conservation efforts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".