Simple metrics to characterize inter‐individual and temporal variation in habitat selection behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individual variation in habitat selection and movement behaviour is receiving growing attention, but primarily with respect to characterizing behaviours in different contexts as opposed to decomposing structure in behaviour within populations. This focus may be limiting advances in understanding the diversity of individual behaviour and its influence on population organization. We propose a framework for characterizing variation in space-use behaviour with the aim of advancing interpretation of its form and function. Using outputs from integrated step-selection analyses of 20 years of telemetry data from African elephants Loxodonta Africana, we developed four metrics characterizing differentiation in resource selection behaviour within a population (specialization [magnitude of the response independent of direction], heterogeneity [inter-individual variation], consistency [temporal shift in response] and reversal [frequency of directional changes in the response]). We contrasted insight from the developed metrics relative to the mean population response using an example focused on two covariates. We then expanded this contrast by evaluating if the metrics identify structurally important information on seasonal shifts in resource selection behaviours in addition to that provided by mean selection coefficients through principal component analyses (PCAs) and a random forest classification. The simplified example highlighted that for some covariates focusing on the population average failed to capture complex individual variation in behaviours. The PCAs revealed that the developed metrics provided additional information in explaining the patterns in elephant selection beyond that offered by population average covariate values. For elephants, specialization and heterogeneity were informative, with specialization often being a better descriptor of differences in seasonal resource selection behaviour than population average responses. Summarizing these metrics spatially and temporally, we illustrate how these metrics can provide insights on overlooked aspects of animal behaviour. Our work offers a new approach in how we conceptualize variation in space-use behaviour (i.e. habitat selection and movement) by providing ways of encapsulating variation that enables diagnoses of the drivers of individual-level variability in a population. The developed metrics explicitly distil how variation in a behaviour is structured among individuals and over time which could facilitate comparative work across time, populations or strata within populations.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".