MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197571196 · doi:10.1111/gean.12303

Analyzing Contacts and Behavior from High Frequency Tracking Data Using the wildlifeDI R Package

2021· article· en· W3197571196 on OpenAlexafffund
Jed Long, Stephen L. Webb, Seth M. Harju, Kenneth L. Gee

Bibliographic record

VenueGeographical Analysis · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNoble Research InstituteMississippi State University
KeywordsOdocoileusR packageComputer scienceTracking (education)WildlifeSuiteWorkflowVariety (cybernetics)Set (abstract data type)Data scienceHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceGeographyDatabaseEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inter‐individual interactions are one of the key factors driving patterns of wildlife movement; however, methods for capturing and analyzing inter‐individual interactions from wildlife tracking data remain limited. Extracting contacts from wildlife tracking data is a challenge owing to the complex spatial and temporal patterns and the volume of tracking data sets. Knowledge of the time and location of contacts are crucial to understanding the spatiotemporal patterns of contacts and how they relate to the environment, individual behavior, and social structure. In this article we introduce a new suite of functions in the wildlifeDI R package for automating contact analysis, summaries, and outputs (e.g., visualizations) from studies tracking many individuals simultaneously, building upon the existing methods for studying interactive behavior between dyads already present within the package. The package has applications to study contact and interaction for the study of animal behavior, social networks, and disease transmission. We demonstrate two applications of contact analysis using the wildlifeDI package: female white‐tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) contacts and contacts between hunters and male white‐tailed deer. The wildlifeDI package represents a new set of advanced, reproducible analyses to identify and study contacts and interactions in wildlife tracking studies. We designed the analyses and outputs to integrate into existing R analysis workflows to facilitate adoption of the package into a wide variety of wildlife tracking studies.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.018

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations31
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeographical AnalysisSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207