MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7046243307

A comparative modeling study on non-climatic and climatic risk assessment on Asian Tiger Mosquito (Aedes albopictus)

2018· article· en· W7046243307 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRUNE (Research UNE) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAedes albopictusHabitatTemperate climateRange (aeronautics)TigerQuarter (Canadian coin)Climate changePrecipitationWetland
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aedes albopictus, the Asian Tiger Mosquito, vector of Chikungunya, Dengue Fever and Zika viruses, has proven its hardy adaptability in expansion from its natural Asian, forest edge, tree hole habitat on the back of international trade transportation, re-establishing in temperate urban surrounds, in a range of water receptacles and semi-enclosures of organic matter. Conventional aerial spray mosquito vector controls focus on wetland and stagnant water expanses, proven to miss the protected hollows and crevices favoured by Ae. albopictus. New control or eradication strategies are thus essential, particular in light of potential expansions in the southeastern and eastern USA. Successful regional vector control strategies require risk level analysis. Should strategies prioritize regions with non-climatic or climatic suitability parameters for Ae. albopictus? Our study used current Ae. albopictus distribution data to develop two independent models: (i) regions with suitable non-climatic factors, and (ii) regions with suitable climate for Ae. albopictus in southeastern USA. Non-climatic model processing used Evidential Belief Function (EBF), together with six geographical conditioning factors (raster data layers), to establish the probability index. Validation of the analysis results was estimated with area under the curve (AUC) using Ae. albopictus presence data. Climatic modeling was based on two General Circulation Models (GCMs), Miroc3.2 and CSIRO-MK30 running the RCP 8.5 scenario in MaxEnt software. EBF non-climatic model results achieved a 0.70 prediction rate and 0.73 success rate, confirming suitability of the study site regions for Ae. albopictus establishment. The climatic model results showed the best-fit model comprised Coldest Quarter Mean Temp, Precipitation of Wettest Quarter and Driest Quarter Precipitation factors with mean AUC value of 0.86. Both GCMs showed that the whole study site is highly suitable and will remain suitable climatically, according to the prediction for 2055, for Ae. albopictus expansion.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.342 · 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