MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414125555 · doi:10.31223/x5r444

Added value of a priori bias correcting dynamically downscaled data for application to species distribution models - a case study for coastal British Columbia

2025· preprint· en· W4414125555 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Dipti Hingmire, Jennifer McHenry, Julia Velletta, Julia K. Baum

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlliance de recherche numérique du Canada
KeywordsA priori and a posterioriClimate changeClimate modelReliability (semiconductor)Climate systemDistribution (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predicting changes in species distributions under climate change relies on high-quality climate projections. In this case study of coastal British Columbia, we prepare and evaluate two sets of climate data - a priori bias corrected and non bias corrected dynamically downscaled historical projections of Community Earth System Model 2 simulations. We compare these datasets with downscaled ERA5 reanalysis focusing on commonly used inputs to species distribution models (SDM), namely, bioclimatic (BIOCLIM) variables and climate extreme indices. Our results show improvements for mean BIOCLIM variables when a priori bias correction is applied. However, modest improvements are observed in terms of variability and extreme indices. Overall, our findings suggest that a priori bias corrected dynamically downscaled climate projections provide more accurate input to SDMs, and thus can improve the reliability of these important ecological models.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.575
Threshold uncertainty score0.845

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate variability and models→French-language works237,207→