Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · September 25, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Knowing where species occur is fundamental for biodiversity research and conservation. Species distribution models (SDMs) link species observations to environmental conditions to estimate their spatial distribution. However, accuracy varies with the underlying data and models, making it essential to know for which species models can be trusted. Deep-learning-based SDMs ("DeepSDMs") now jointly model thousands of species, drawing on hundreds of millions of community-science records. At this scale, averaging performance hides substantial species-level variability, particularly for rare species, often of greatest conservation concern. Records are also strongly biased, making occurrence counts misleading. Accounting for these factors is essential for a reliable and informative evaluation of multi-species SDMs. Here, we introduce a Sampling-Aware Global Evaluation (SAGE) benchmark, combining GBIF records for training with sPlotOpen vegetation plots for presence-absence evaluation across 5771 plant species. We propose an evaluation framework that groups species based on two properties, sampling effort and relative prevalence, which describe how densely a species' range is sampled and how frequently the species is recorded. Evaluating single-species SDMs and multi-species DeepSDMs, we find that Random Forests and DeepSDMs perform best overall, but neither dominates: DeepSDMs outperform single-species SDMs for infrequently recorded species while offering no consistent advantage for well-sampled ones. Crucially, this advantage emerges only when established bias-correction practices, such as spatial thinning and reweighting, are carried over to the deep-learning setting. SAGE helps identify the species and data conditions for which a given approach is beneficial, thereby supporting the development of more transparent and ecologically credible SDMs. Data and code: https://earens.github.io/sage/