Estimating encounter location distributions from animal tracking data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ecologists have long been interested in linking individual behavior with higher-level processes. For motile species, this ‘upscaling’ is governed by how well any given movement strategy maximizes encounters with positive factors, and minimizes encounters with negative factors. Despite the importance of encounter events for a broad range of ecological processes, encounter theory has not kept pace with developments in animal tracking or movement modeling. Furthermore, existing work has focused primarily on the relationship between animal movement and encounter rates while no theoretical framework exists for directly relating individual movement with the spatial locations of encounter events in the environment. Here, we bridge this gap by introducing a new theoretical concept describing the long-term encounter location probabilities for movement within home ranges, termed the conditional distribution of encounters (CDE). We then derive this distribution, as well as confidence intervals, implement its statistical estimator into open source software, and demonstrate the broad ecological relevance of this novel concept. We first use simulated data to show how our estimator provides asymptotically consistent estimates. We then demonstrate the general utility of this method for three simulation-based scenarios that occur routinely in biological systems: i) a population of individuals with home ranges that overlap with neighbors; ii) a pair of individuals with a hard territorial border between their home ranges; and iii) a predator with a large home range that encompassed the home ranges of multiple prey individuals. Using GPS data from white-faced capuchins ( Cebus capucinus ) tracked on Barro Colorado Island, Panama, and sleepy lizards ( Tiliqua rugosa ) tracked in Bundey, South Australia, we then show how the CDE can be used to estimate the locations of territorial borders, identify key resources, quantify the location-specific potential for competition, and/or identify any changes in behaviour that directly result from location-specific encounter probability. This novel target distribution enables researchers to better understand the dynamics of populations of interacting individuals. Notably, the general estimation framework developed in this work builds straightforwardly off of home range estimation and requires no specialised data collection protocols. This method is now openly available via the ctmm R package.
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 | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".