Temporal autocorrelation functions for movement rates from global positioning system radiotelemetry data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autocorrelation has been viewed as a problem in telemetry studies because sequential observations are not independent in time or space, therefore violating assumptions for statistical inference. Yet nearly all ecological and behavioural data are autocorrelated in both space and time. We argue that there is much to learn about the structure of ecological and behavioural data from patterns of autocorrelation. Such patterns include periodicity in movement and patchiness in spatial data, which can be characterized by an autocorrelogram, semivariogram or spectrum. We illustrate the utility of temporal autocorrelation functions (ACFs) for analysing step-length data from GPS telemetry of wolves (Canis lupus), cougars (Puma concolor), grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) and elk (Cervus elaphus) in western Alberta. ACFs often differ by season, reflecting differences in foraging behaviour. In wilderness landscapes, step-length ACFs for predators decay slowly to apparently random patterns, but sometimes display strong daily rhythms in areas of human disturbance. In contrast, step lengths of elk are consistently periodic, reflecting crepuscular activity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".