Adjusting for Undercoverage of Access-Points in Creel Surveys with Fewer Overflights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Creel surveys are used in recreational fisheries to estimate angling effort, catch, and harvest. Aerial-access creel surveys rely on two components: (1) a ground component in which fishing parties returning from their trips are interviewed at some access-points of the fishery; (2) an aerial component in which the number of fishing parties is counted. A common practice is to sample fewer aerial survey days than ground survey days. This is thought by practitioners to reduce the cost of the survey, but there is a lack of sound statistical methodology for this case. In this article, we propose various estimation methods to handle this situation and evaluate their asymptotic properties from a design-based perspective. We also propose formulas for the optimal allocation of the effort between the ground and the aerial portion of the survey, for given costs and budget. A simulation study investigates the performance of the estimators. Finally, we apply our methods to data from an annual Kootenay Lake survey (Canada).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".