MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409265954 · doi:10.1111/icad.12826

Butterflies at porch lights: Exploring nocturnal light visitation in butterflies using community science data from <scp>iNaturalist</scp>

2025· article· en· W4409265954 on OpenAlex
John Deitsch, Brett Seymoure

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInsect Conservation and Diversity · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicImpact of Light on Environment and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Texas at El Paso
KeywordsNocturnalPorchButterflyEcologyCitizen scienceBiologyGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Artificial light at night (ALAN) is altering natural light conditions globally, with dramatic effects on insect behaviour. Flight‐to‐light behaviour is one of the most noticeable and ecologically significant impacts. Research has focused on nocturnal and crepuscular insect taxa, but diurnal insects also exhibit flight‐to‐light behaviour. Community science is increasingly recognised as useful for biological research. iNaturalist is an unstructured community science project where observations are geo‐tagged photos of organisms. We downloaded iNaturalist observations of butterflies at artificial light sources in the United States and Canada. We manually verified that observations were from light sources and recorded light source information. We examined light visitation in butterflies and checked for signals of natural history traits predicting light visitation at a species level. We compiled 384 observations of butterflies at light sources, representing 107 species, 74 genera and all six diurnal butterfly families. Most observations came from residential light sources or insect sampling/observation schemes (e.g., moth sheets). Observation frequency at lights varied across butterfly families: Lycaenidae were observed the most and Papilionidae the least. Habitat preference may influence light visitation: closed‐habitat species were observed more frequently than open‐habitat species. There were no clear relationships between observation frequency and wingspan or migratory behaviour. A broad diversity of butterflies has been observed at artificial light sources. Butterfly species differ in the frequency with which they are reported at light sources on iNaturalist. Natural history traits may be useful in predicting a species' vulnerability to ALAN.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.183
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.123 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it