An Integrated Global‐To‐Regional Scale Workflow for Simulating Climate Change Impacts on Marine Ecosystems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract As the urgency to evaluate the impacts of climate change on marine ecosystems increases, there is a need to develop robust projections and improve the uptake of ecosystem model outputs in policy and planning. Standardizing input and output data is a crucial step in evaluating and communicating results, but can be challenging when using models with diverse structures, assumptions, and outputs that address region‐specific issues. We developed an implementation framework and workflow to standardize the climate and fishing forcings used by regional models contributing to the Fisheries and Marine Ecosystem Model Intercomparison Project (FishMIP) and to facilitate comparative analyses across models and a wide range of regions, in line with the FishMIP 3a protocol. We applied our workflow to three case study areas‐models: the Baltic Sea Mizer, Hawai'i‐based Longline fisheries therMizer, and the southern Benguela ecosystem Atlantis marine ecosystem models. We then selected the most challenging steps of the workflow and illustrated their implementation in different model types and regions. Our workflow is adaptable across a wide range of regional models, from non‐spatially explicit to spatially explicit and fully‐depth resolved models and models that include one or several fishing fleets. This workflow will facilitate the development of regional marine ecosystem model ensembles and enhance future research on marine ecosystem model development and applications, model evaluation and benchmarking, and global‐to‐regional model comparisons.
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 | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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".