Vascular plant biodiversity and floristics of the Canadian Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract:Despite nearly 200 years of exploration, substantial gaps remain in our understanding of the diversity and distribution of the vascular plant flora of the Canadian Arctic, which comprises over one third of the global Arctic ecozone. Detailed information on the diversity and distribution of Arctic plants is urgently needed to understand the potential impacts of climate change on the region’s flora. Since 2008 we have been conducting detailed floristic surveys in botanically-understudied regions of the Canadian Arctic. The comprehensive baseline data of our >8000 new collections, all housed in the National Herbarium of Canada and other herbaria in Canada and internationally, adds important knowledge to our understanding of Arctic plant biodiversity. Many of our collections represent first records for specific areas, others represent the second or third collections of poorly-known species at the edge of their ranges in the Canadian Arctic, and many fill in gaps in the known distributions of Arctic species. We will summarize our floristic work to date in the context of current understanding of the Canadian Arctic flora, with a focus on our many particularly noteworthy discoveries. Poster presented at XIX International Botanical Congress, Shenzhen, China, 23–29 July 2017.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".