Seeing Above and Below the Canopy: Modeling and Interpreting Species Occupancy with Multimodal Habitat Representations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Effective conservation and restoration of species is an increasingly urgent priority. To design management strategies that improve species success, we need a solid understanding of the habitat characteristics that support it. Occupancy models are statistical tools that ecologists use to model these relationships from data. Yet, current models represent habitats with coarse-scale environmental variables that fail to capture important microhabitat features. We show that these limitations can be addressed by incorporating AI-derived, multimodal habitat representations from overhead satellite imagery and ground-level camera-trap imagery. Across geography and species, these representations yield more accurate out-of-sample predictions than models based on conventional covariates alone, and combining satellite and ground-level views provides complementary gains. To translate improved prediction into actionable ecological insight, we further introduce a method that makes black-box AI-derived habitat representations interpretable by summarizing key factors contributing to occupancy probability into text-based descriptions. We then generate a per-site score for each description, which can replace black-box features to transparently link discovered habitat elements to species occurrence while maintaining predictive performance. Our approach provides a path toward microhabitat-aware and interpretable species-habitat models that support restoration planning and management decisions. We implement our method in an open-source Python package bridging AI and statistical ecology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".