MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Statistical Evaluation of Behavior and Population Dynamics Models Predicting Movement and Proportional Entrainment Loss of Adult Delta Smelt in the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta

2021· article· en· W3138095987 on OpenAlexaff
Josh Korman, Edward S. Gross, Lenny Grimaldo

Bibliographic record

VenueSan Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsEcoMetrix
FundersBureau of ReclamationU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceCalifornia Department of Fish and WildlifeDepartment of Water Resources
KeywordsDeltaSmeltSan JoaquinPopulationEntrainment (biomusicology)Environmental scienceRiver deltaGeographyHydrology (agriculture)DemographyFisheryGeologyEngineeringFish <Actinopterygii>PhysicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been considerable debate about effects of entrainment of endangered Delta Smelt (Hypomesus transpacificus) at water export facilities located in the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta. In this paper we use a behavior-driven movement model (BMM) to simulate the movement of adult Delta Smelt, which, in conjunction with a population dynamics model, estimates the proportion of the population that is lost to entrainment, i.e., proportional entrainment loss (PEL). Parameters of the population model are estimated by maximum likelihood by comparing predictions to data from Fall Midwater Trawl (FMWT) and Spring Kodiak Trawl (SKT) surveys, as well as to daily salvage estimates. Our objectives are to evaluate different movement behavior hypotheses, to rank estimates of PEL based on how well predictions fit the data, and to sharpen our understanding of the data to inform future research and monitoring decisions. We applied the modeling framework to data from water year 2002—a year when salvage was high—and tested 30 combinations of six behavior and five population dynamics models. More complex process and observation assumptions in the population model led to much improved fits in most cases, but did not appreciably influence PEL predictions, which were largely determined by movement predictions from the BMMs. Estimates of PEL varied considerably among behaviors (2% to 40%). The model with the highest predictive capability explained 98% of the variation in FMWT data across regions, 70% of the variation in SKT data across regions and surveys, and 28% and 43% of the daily variation in salvage at federal and state fish screening facilities, respectively. The PEL estimate from this model was 35%, more than double the original estimate from Kimmerer (2008) of 15%. While PEL estimates provided in this study should be considered preliminary, our framework for testing combined behavior-driven movement models and population dynamics models is an improvement compared to earlier efforts.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.236 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSan Francisco Estuary and Watershed ScienceSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207