MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Combining Band Recovery Data and Pollock's Robust Design to Model Temporary and Permanent Emigration

2001· article· en· W2139571183 on OpenAlexaff
M. S. Lindberg, William L. Kendall, James E. Hines, Michael G. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsDucks Unlimited Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmigrationPollockStatisticsMark and recaptureSampling (signal processing)PopulationSampling designPopulation modelBiological dispersalEconometricsEcologyGeographyMathematicsBiologyDemographyComputer scienceFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Capture-recapture models are widely used to estimate demographic parameters of marked populations. Recently, this statistical theory has been extended to modeling dispersal of open populations. Multistate models can be used to estimate movement probabilities among subdivided populations if multiple sites are sampled. Frequently, however, sampling is limited to a single site. Models described by Burnham (1993, in Marked Individuals in the Study of Bird Populations, 199-213), which combined open population capture-recapture and band-recovery models, can be used to estimate permanent emigration when sampling is limited to a single population. Similarly, Kendall, Nichols, and Hines (1997, Ecology 51, 563-578) developed models to estimate temporary emigration under Pollock's (1982, Journal of Wildlife Management 46, 757-760) robust design. We describe a likelihood-based approach to simultaneously estimate temporary and permanent emigration when sampling is limited to a single population. We use a sampling design that combines the robust design and recoveries of individuals obtained immediately following each sampling period. We present a general form for our model where temporary emigration is a first-order Markov process, and we discuss more restrictive models. We illustrate these models with analysis of data on marked Canvasback ducks. Our analysis indicates that probability of permanent emigration for adult female Canvasbacks was 0.193 (SE = 0.082) and that birds that were present at the study area in year i - 1 had a higher probability of presence in year i than birds that were not present in year i - 1.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations58
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometricsSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207