MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6967297643 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.10719534

A beneficial arthropod dataset for agricultural landscapes in Western Canada and adjacent mountain ecosystems

2024· other· en· W6967297643 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaDucks Unlimited CanadaSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiodiversitySpecies richnessHabitatArthropodAbundance (ecology)RangelandEcosystemPollinator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the largest drivers of global biodiversity trends is land use change and habitat loss. Through several studies of beneficial arthropods, we have compiled a spatially- extensive passive-sampling arthropod dataset for Western Canada focused on landscape diversity. This dataset, collected from 2015-2019, consists of more than 200,000 specimens, five arthropod orders, and 26 families of either pollinators (Hymenoptera, Diptera) or natural enemies of pests (Coleoptera, Araneae, Opiliones). In the research that collectively makes up this dataset, there are 409 sampling sites in two focal areas: the Canadian Rockies (n=70) and the agriculturally intense Canadian prairies (n=339). Sampled in the montane region focused on Bombus species, while both pollinators and natural enemies were sampled in the prairies. Within the prairie region, there was also a focus on non-crop habitat that occurs within or adjacent to the annual crop fields and rangelands that dominate the region. This data can be used to investigate beneficial insect abundance and richness over a gradient of elevation, land cover, landscape diversity and climate.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.005

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→French-language works237,207→