MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2300162145 · doi:10.1007/s00285-016-1021-5

The critical domain size of stochastic population models

2016· article· en· W2300162145 on OpenAlexafffund
Jody R. Reimer, Michael B. Bonsall, Philip K. Maini

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematical Biology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBranching processPopulationBiological dispersalBranching (polymer chemistry)Stochastic processMathematicsPopulation sizeStatistical physicsDomain (mathematical analysis)EconometricsEcologyStatisticsBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identifying the critical domain size necessary for a population to persist is an important question in ecology. Both demographic and environmental stochasticity impact a population's ability to persist. Here we explore ways of including this variability. We study populations with distinct dispersal and sedentary stages, which have traditionally been modelled using a deterministic integrodifference equation (IDE) framework. Individual-based models (IBMs) are the most intuitive stochastic analogues to IDEs but yield few analytic insights. We explore two alternate approaches; one is a scaling up to the population level using the Central Limit Theorem, and the other a variation on both Galton-Watson branching processes and branching processes in random environments. These branching process models closely approximate the IBM and yield insight into the factors determining the critical domain size for a given population subject to stochasticity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematical BiologySame topicMathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology ModelsFrench-language works237,207