A New Method for Estimation of Resource Selection Probability Function
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
ABSTRACT Weighted distributions can be used to fit various forms of resource selection probability functions (RSPF) under the use‐versus‐available study design (Lele and Keim 2006). Although valid, the numerical maximization procedure used by Lele and Keim (2006) is unstable because of the inherent roughness of the Monte Carlo likelihood function. We used a combination of the methods of partial likelihood and data cloning to obtain maximum likelihood estimators of the RSPF in a numerically stable fashion. We demonstrated the methodology using simulated data sets generated under the log—log RSPF model and a reanalysis of telemetry data presented in Lele and Keim (2006) using the logistic RSPF model. The new method for estimation of RSPF can be used to understand differential selection of resources by animals, an essential component of studies in conservation biology, wildlife management, and applied ecology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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