MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2315710929 · doi:10.1139/f2011-175

Low-cost estimates of mortality rate from single tag recoveries: addressing short-term trap-happy and trap-shy bias

2012· article· en· W2315710929 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Richard McGarvey, Janet M. Matthews

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrap (plumbing)StatisticsEstimatorStock assessmentEconometricsMaximum likelihoodMortality rateStock (firearms)BiologyMathematicsEnvironmental scienceFisheryDemographyGeographyFishing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional single tag-recovery data are widely available for stock assessments, notably of invertebrate fisheries, worldwide. Though not commonly used for this purpose, the times-at-large in single tag-recovery data provide (relatively) direct information about average mortality rate as a sample of survival times. Mortality rate is estimated using simple formulas given as functions of the mean time-at-large of tagged and recaptured animals. Here we extend an earlier time-at-large mortality estimator to address a potentially common source of bias: trap-happy or trap-shy behavior shortly following tag release. A maximum likelihood solution is derived, yielding an unbiased estimate of instantaneous mortality rate where the interval of usable times-at-large for observed recaptures may be truncated on both sides to any biologist-chosen experimental (recapture) time frame. In tests of the new doubly-truncated mortality estimator using simulated tag-recovery times-at-large, omitting the first 8 weeks of recaptures from the mortality estimate largely eliminated the bias introduced by simulated short-term trap-happy and trap-shy behavior. Bias in the mortality estimate declined by an order of magnitude more than the observed increase in standard error.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→