EcologicalNetworksDynamics.jl: A Julia package to simulate the temporal dynamics of complex ecological networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Species interactions play a crucial role in shaping biodiversity, species coexistence, population dynamics, community stability and ecosystem functioning. Our understanding of the role of the diversity of species interactions driving these species, community and ecosystem features is limited because current approaches often focus only on trophic interactions. This is why a new modelling framework that includes a greater diversity of interactions between species is crucially needed. We developed a modular, user‐friendly, and extensible Julia package that delivers the core functionality of the bio‐energetic food web model. Moreover, it embeds several ecological interaction types alongside the capacity to manipulate external drivers of ecological dynamics. These new features represent important processes known to influence biodiversity, coexistence, functioning and stability in natural communities. Specifically, they include: (a) an explicit multiple nutrient intake model for producers, (b) competition among producers, (c) temperature dependence implemented via the Boltzmann‐Arhennius rule, and (d) the ability to model several non‐trophic interactions including competition for space, plant facilitation, predator interference and refuge provisioning. The inclusion of the various features provides users with the ability to ask questions about multiple simultaneous processes and stressor impacts, and thus develop theory relevant to real world scenarios facing complex ecological communities in the Anthropocene. It will allow researchers to quantify the relative importance of different mechanisms to stability and functioning of complex communities. The package was build for theoreticians seeking to explore the effects of different types of species interactions on the dynamics of complex ecological communities, but also for empiricists seeking to confront their empirical findings with theoretical expectations. The package provides a straightforward framework to model explicitly complex ecological communities or provide tools to generate those communities from few parameters.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.007 |
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".