MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789596487 · doi:10.1214/17-aoas1108

Simultaneous modelling of movement, measurement error, and observer dependence in mark-recapture distance sampling: An application to Arctic bird surveys

2018· article· en· W2789596487 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of Applied Statistics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorDistance samplingMark and recaptureObserver (physics)StatisticsAbundance estimationSampling (signal processing)Observational errorComputer scienceAbundance (ecology)MathematicsEconometricsEcologyBiologyComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mark-recapture distance sampling is a promising method for surveying bird populations from aircraft in open landscapes. However, commonly available distance sampling estimators require that distances to target animals are made without error and that animals are stationary while sampling is being conducted. Motivated by a recent bird survey where these requirements were routinely violated, we describe a marginal likelihood framework for estimating abundance from double-observer data that can accommodate movement and measurement error when observations are made consecutively (as with front and rear observers), when animals are uniformly distributed during detection by the first observer, and when detections consist of both moving and stationary animals. Assuming that all animals are subject to measurement error and that some animals can move between detections, we integrate over unknown animal locations to construct a marginal likelihood for detection, movement, and measurement error parameters. Estimates of animal abundance are then obtained using a modified Horvitz–Thompson-like estimator. In addition, unmodelled heterogeneity in detection probability can be accommodated through observer dependence parameters. Using simulation, we show that our approach yields low bias compared to approaches that ignore movement and/or measurement error, including in cases where there is considerable detection heterogeneity. Applying our approach to data from a double-observer waterfowl helicopter survey in northern Canada, we are able to estimate bird density accounting for movement and measurement error and corrected for observer heterogeneity. Our approach appears promising for generating unbiased estimates of bird abundance necessary for reliable conservation and management.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.499
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.194 · 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