Loglinear Models for the Robust Design in Mark–Recapture Experiments
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The robust design is a method for implementing a mark-recapture experiment featuring a nested sampling structure. The first level consists of primary sampling sessions; the population experiences mortality and immigration between primary sessions so that open population models apply at this level. The second level of sampling has a short mark-recapture study within each primary session. Closed population models are used at this stage to estimate the animal abundance at each primary session. This article suggests a loglinear technique to fit the robust design. Loglinear models for the analysis of mark-recapture data from closed and open populations are first reviewed. These two types of models are then combined to analyze the data from a robust design. The proposed loglinear approach to the robust design allows incorporating parameters for a heterogeneity in the capture probabilities of the units within each primary session. Temporary emigration out of the study area can also be accounted for in the loglinear framework. The analysis is relatively simple; it relies on a large Poisson regression with the vector of frequencies of the capture histories as dependent variable. An example concerned with the estimation of abundance and survival of the red-back vole in an area of southeastern Québec is presented.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it