MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223923775 · doi:10.1002/bimj.202100231

Semiparametric empirical likelihood inference for abundance from one‐inflated capture–recapture data

2022· article· en· W4223923775 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrical Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCensus and Population Estimation
Canadian institutionsActuaUniversity of Waterloo
FundersHigher Education Discipline Innovation ProjectChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMark and recaptureInferenceStatisticsAbundance (ecology)EconometricsAbundance estimationEmpirical likelihoodMaximum likelihoodSemiparametric modelMathematicsComputer scienceBiologyEcologyNonparametric statisticsDemographyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abundance estimation from capture-recapture data is of great importance in many disciplines. Analysis of capture-recapture data is often complicated by the existence of one-inflation and heterogeneity problems. Simultaneously taking these issues into account, existing abundance estimation methods are usually constructed on the basis of conditional likelihood under one-inflated zero-truncated count models. However, the resulting Horvitz-Thompson-type estimators may be unstable, and the resulting Wald-type confidence intervals may exhibit severe undercoverage. In this paper, we propose a semiparametric empirical likelihood (EL) approach to abundance estimation under one-inflated binomial and Poisson regression models. To facilitate the computation of the EL method, we develop an expectation-maximization algorithm. We also propose a new score test for the existence of one-inflation and prove its asymptotic normality. Our simulation studies indicate that compared with existing estimators, the proposed score test is more powerful and the maximum EL estimator has a smaller mean square error. The advantages of our approaches are further demonstrated by analyses of prinia data from Hong Kong and drug user data from Bangkok.

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)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.207 · 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