Spatial coherence of ecosystem indicators across the Scotian Shelf, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Marine ecosystems are subject to increasing pressure from climate change and a range of anthropogenic activities such as fishing, aquaculture, tourism, and energy extraction that take place at multiple spatial scales. Understanding the complex interplay between spatially and temporally varying marine ecosystem dynamics is needed for long-term sustainable management. Implementation of ecosystem-based management (EBM) relies in part on ecological indicators that link science to policy while also providing a means to explore ecosystem response to change and to assess progress toward management and policy goals. EBM requires reliable and robust indicators at commensurate spatial scales to assess the ecological impacts of pressures and management actions. We evaluated the spatial and temporal behaviour of ecological indicators at multiple spatial scales to answer three main questions: (i) Is the spatial and temporal resolution of current data collection in the Scotian Shelf fine-grained enough to detect changes in key indicators at the strata level? (ii) How closely do fluctuations in time series at the survey strata level match those at the larger spatial scales? (iii) Is there spatial coherence across survey strata and indicators? We developed a process for examining the reliability and robustness of ecological indicators at differing spatial scales to show that scale does indeed matter.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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 teacher head, 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".