A simulation study of impacts of error structure on modeling stockrecruitment data using generalized linear models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stockrecruitment (SR) models are commonly fitted to SR data with a least-squares method. Errors in modeling are usually assumed to be normal or lognormal, regardless of whether such an assumption is realistic. A Monte Carlo simulation approach was used to evaluate the impact of the assumption of error structure on SR modeling. The generalized linear model, which can readily deal with different error structures, was used in estimating parameters. This study suggests that the quality of SR parameter estimation, measured by estimation errors, can be influenced by the realism of error structure assumed in an estimation, the number of SR data points, and the number of outliers in modeling. A small number of SR data points and the presence of outliers in SR data could increase the difficulty in identifying an appropriate error structure in modeling, which might lead to large biases in the SR param eter estimation. This study shows that generalized linear model methods can help identify an appropriate error distribution in SR modeling, leading to an improved estimation of parameters even when there are outliers and the number of SR data points is small. We recommend the generalized linear model be used for quantifying stockrecruitment 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".