A hierarchical Bayesian approach to multi‐state mark–recapture: simulations and applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Mark–recapture models are valuable for assessing diverse demographic and behavioural parameters, yet the precision of traditional estimates is often constrained by sparse empirical data. Bayesian inference explicitly recognizes estimation uncertainty, and hierarchical Bayes has proven particularly useful for dealing with sparseness by combining information across data sets. We developed a general hierarchical Bayesian multi‐state mark–recapture model, tested its performance on simulated data sets and applied it to real ecological data on stopovers by migratory birds. Our hierarchical model performed well in terms of both precision and accuracy of parameters when tested with simulated data of varying quality (sample size, capture and survivorship probabilities). It also provided more precise and accurate parameter estimates than a non‐hierarchical model when data were sparse. A specific version of the model, designed for estimation of daily transience and departure of migratory birds at a mid‐route stopover, was applied to 11 years of autumn migration data from Atlantic Canada. Hierarchical estimates of departure and transience were more precise than those derived from parallel non‐hierarchical and frequentist methods, and indicated that inter‐annual variability in parameters suggested by these other methods was largely due to sampling error. Synthesis and applications. Estimates of demographic parameters, often derived from mark–recapture studies, provide the basis for evaluating the status of species at risk, for developing conservation and management strategies and for evaluating the results of current protocols. The hierarchical Bayesian multi‐state mark–recapture model presented here permits partitioning of complex parameter variation across space or time, and the simultaneous analysis of multiple data sets results in a marked increase in the precision of estimates derived from sparse capture data. Its structural flexibility should make it a valuable tool for conservation ecologists and wildlife managers.
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 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".