The utility of joinpoint regression for estimating population parameters given changes in population structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The method of joinpoint regression has been used in numerous domains to assess changes in time series data, including such things as cancer mortality rates, motor vehicle collision mortalities, and disease risk. To help improve estimation of population parameters for use in ecological risk assessment and management, we present a simulation and analysis to describe the utility of this method for the ecological domain. We demonstrate how joinpoint regression can accurately identify if the population structure changes based on time series of abundance, as well as identify when this change occurs. In addition, we compare and contrast population parameter estimates derived through joinpoint and surplus production methods to those derived from standard surplus production methods alone. When considering a change point at 32 years (out of a 64 year simulation), the joinpoint regression model was able, on average, to estimate a joinpoint time of 32.31 years with a variance of 6.82 and 95% confidence interval for the mean relative bias of (0.0085, 0.0112). The model was able to consistently estimate population parameters, with variance of these estimations decreasing as the change in these population parameters increased. We conclude that joinpoint regression be added to the list of methods employed by those who assess ecological risk to allow for a more accurate and complete understanding of population dynamics.
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 | 0.013 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".