Analysis of band‐recovery data in a multistate capture‐recapture framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Dead recoveries of marked animals are commonly used to estimate survival probabilities. Band‐recovery models can be parameterized either by r (the probability of recovering a band conditional on death of the animal) or by f (the probability that an animal will be killed, retrieved, and have its band reported). The T parametrization can be implemented in a capture‐recapture framework with two states (alive and newly dead), mortality being the transition probability between the two states. The authors show here that the f parametrization can also be implemented in a multistate framework by imposing simple constraints on some parameters. They illustrate it using data on the mallard and the snow goose. However, they mention that because it does not entirely separate the individual survival and encounter processes, the f parametrization must be used with care on reduced models, or in the presence of estimates at the boundary of the parameter space. As they show, a multistate framework allows the use of powerful software for model fitting or testing the goodness‐of‐fit of models; it also affords the implementation of complex models such as those based on mixture of information or uncertain states
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".