Hierarchical Bayesian analysis to incorporate age uncertainty in growth curve analysis and estimates of age from length: Florida manatee (Trichechus manatus) carcasses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Age estimation of individuals is often an integral part of species management research, and a number of age-estimation techniques are commonly employed. Often, the error in these techniques is not quantified or accounted for in other analyses, particularly in growth curve models used to describe physiological responses to environment and human impacts. Also, noninvasive, quick, and inexpensive methods to estimate age are needed. This research aims to provide two Bayesian methods to (i) incorporate age uncertainty into an age–length Schnute growth model and (ii) produce a method from the growth model to estimate age from length. The methods are then employed for Florida manatee ( Trichechus manatus ) carcasses. After quantifying the uncertainty in the aging technique (counts of ear bone growth layers), we fit age–length data to the Schnute growth model separately by sex and season. Independent prior information about population age structure and the results of the Schnute model are then combined to estimate age from length. Results describing the age–length relationship agree with our understanding of manatee biology. The new methods allow us to estimate age, with quantified uncertainty, for 98% of collected carcasses: 36% from ear bones, 62% from length.
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 | 0.009 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".