A ERSF-VIPA framework: scalable wildlife movement modelling for conflict mitigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Effective conservation planning and conflict mitigation can hinge on accurately modelling wildlife movement paths (WMPs), yet progress is hindered by both a shortage of reliable methods and limited data. The critical challenge, therefore, is to devise limited-data models that faithfully reproduce elusive species' movements and deliver actionable insights for human-wildlife conflict management. 2. We introduce the Enhanced Resource Selection Function-Vector-network Iterative Pathfinding Algorithm (ERSF-VIPA), a novel framework for simulating WMPs with limited data. Drawing on historical occurrence records of Asian elephants (Elephas maximus), we assume individuals make rational, goal-driven decisions based on local environmental knowledge. The ERSF employs a random forest on a hexagonal grid to estimate nonlinear resource-selection probabilities, while VIPA conducts an iterative, node-to-node search across that hexagonal vector network-scoring each candidate by combining selection probability with cubic distance coefficients to ensure ecological validity and energetic efficiency. 3. The model demonstrates high accuracy, with 90.3% of the 68 simulated paths approximating the observed paths with an average maximum deviation of 418 m. These findings underscore the model's robustness and its capacity to translate limited tracking data into actionable insights for conservation. 4. ERSF-VIPA operates using only coarse, non-continuous historical data that lack precise timestamps or spatial accuracy. By operating with minimal data requirements, ERSF-VIPA demonstrates exceptional extensibility and broad applicability for reconstructing movement paths of elusive wildlife species. Its proven accuracy in simulating Asian elephant paths further positions it as a potentially powerful decision-support framework for real-time animal monitoring and proactive human-wildlife conflict mitigation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".