MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086084192 · doi:10.1139/f08-023

A regression mixture with logistic weights for modeling heterogeneous crustacean growth data when the maturity phase is unknown

2008· article· en· W2086084192 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Tobie Surette, Jacques Allard

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité de Moncton
KeywordsLogistic regressionStatisticsLogistic functionConfidence intervalMathematicsMaturity (psychological)Linear regressionMoultingBiologySegmented regressionRegressionRegression analysisEconometricsEcologyNonlinear regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Piecewise linear models (PLMs) have been used widely in crustacean morphometry and growth modeling when subjects belong to more than one undetermined maturity stage, for example, to model immature and adolescent male snow crab (Chionoecetes opilio) growth increment at moulting as a function of pre-moult size. PLMs assume, unrealistically, that the transition between the maturity stages occurs at a fixed size. PLMs have also often been applied without taking into account the heterogeneity of variance or without supplying parameter confidence intervals. We propose to describe the unknown maturity stage and the known growth increments as functions of the pre-moult size by regression mixture with logistic weights (RMLW), where a logistic function and two linear regressions are mixed with weights provided by the logistic function. Errors are assumed to be normally distributed with a standard deviation depending linearly on the expected growth increment. Parameters and their confidence intervals are obtained using maximum likelihood. Model diagnostic procedures and a posteriori maturity stage classification methods are presented. The methodology is applied to 1311 snow crab growth observations, and results are compared with those of other snow crab studies. The methodology has widespread applications to crustacean morphometry and can be generalized to nonlinear relationships.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207