MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1552293040 · doi:10.1002/jwmg.748

Hierarchical model analysis of the Atlantic Flyway Breeding Waterfowl Survey

2014· article· en· W1552293040 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

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
KeywordsFlywayWaterfowlAnasPopulationBrantaPopulation modelGeographyMultilevel modelStatisticsPopulation sizeBreeding bird surveyWildlifeEcologyBiologyDemographyHabitatMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We used log‐linear hierarchical models to analyze data from the Atlantic Flyway Breeding Waterfowl Survey. The survey has been conducted by state biologists each year since 1989 in the northeastern United States from Virginia north to New Hampshire and Vermont. Although yearly population estimates from the survey are used by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service for estimating regional waterfowl population status for mallards ( Anas platyrhynchos ), black ducks ( Anas rubripes ), wood ducks ( Aix sponsa ), and Canada geese ( Branta canadensis ), they are not routinely adjusted to control for time of day effects and other survey design issues. The hierarchical model analysis permits estimation of year effects and population change while accommodating the repeated sampling of plots and controlling for time of day effects in counting. We compared population estimates from the current stratified random sample analysis to population estimates from hierarchical models with alternative model structures that describe year to year changes as random year effects, a trend with random year effects, or year effects modeled as 1‐year differences. Patterns of population change from the hierarchical model results generally were similar to the patterns described by stratified random sample estimates, but significant visibility differences occurred between twilight to midday counts in all species. Controlling for the effects of time of day resulted in larger population estimates for all species in the hierarchical model analysis relative to the stratified random sample analysis. The hierarchical models also provided a convenient means of estimating population trend as derived statistics from the analysis. We detected significant declines in mallard and American black ducks and significant increases in wood ducks and Canada geese, a trend that had not been significant for 3 of these 4 species in the prior analysis. We recommend using hierarchical models for analysis of the Atlantic Flyway Breeding Waterfowl Survey. Published 2014. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.273 · 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