MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414770190 · doi:10.1101/2025.09.30.679621

Population-level migration modeling of North America’s birds through data integration with BirdFlow

2025· preprint· en· W4414770190 on OpenAlexaff
Yangkang Chen, David Slager, Ethan Plunkett, Miguel Fuentes, Yuting Deng, Stuart A. Mackenzie, Lucas E. Berrigan, Daniel Fink, Daniel Sheldon, Benjamin M. Van Doren, Adriaan M. Dokter

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsBirds Canada
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyMassachusetts Green High Performance Computing CenterNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGlobal Positioning SystemData integrationData modelingProbabilistic logicGeneralizability theoryTracking (education)Movement (music)Statistical model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Accurate information on population-level movements of migratory animals is essential for understanding migration and for designing effective conservation strategies in a changing world. Yet such information remains scarce for most migratory species due to the effort and expense needed to collect data across their full distribution ranges. BirdFlow is a probabilistic modeling framework that infers population-level movements from weekly species distribution maps produced by the participatory science project eBird. However, BirdFlow models have only been tuned for a handful of species using high-resolution individual tracking data, which is not available for most migratory species. Methods Here, we introduce a general tuning and evaluation framework for BirdFlow that enables the first large-scale integration of distributional and individual-level data to infer animal movement across continents and hundreds of migratory species, eliminating reliance on any single individual-tracking data source. By generalizing the BirdFlow model parametrization, we enable tuning and validation using multiple complementary data sources, including GPS tracks, banding recoveries, and radio telemetry data from the Motus Wildlife Tracking System. We investigate the efficacy of this approach by (1) investigating predictive performance compared to null models; (2) validating the biological plausibility of BirdFlow models by comparing movement properties such as route straightness, number of stopovers, and migration speed between model-generated routes and real movement tracks; and (3) comparing the performance of models tuned on species-specific movement data to models tuned using hyperparameters transferred from other species. Results Our results show that BirdFlow models produced by the new tuning framework achieve biologically realistic performance, even for prediction horizons of thousands of kilometers and several months. When species-specific data are unavailable, models can still be tuned using data from other phylogenetically adjacent species to achieve improved performance. Conclusions By integrating eBird Status & Trends abundance surfaces with data from banding recaptures, radio telemetry, and GPS tracking, we scale BirdFlow model to 153 North American migratory species, representing the first collection of continental-scale population-level movement and forecasting models. Species-specific tuning improves population-level movement forecasts, while taxonomically informed hyperparameter transfer supports the modeling of data-limited species. Overall, our work offers a foundation for more accurate predictions across hundreds of species for research in ecology and conservation, disease surveillance, aviation, and public outreach.

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)0.007
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 score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change→French-language works237,207→