Data from: Assessing the impacts of imperfect detection on estimates of diversity and community structure through multispecies occupancy modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Detecting all species in a given survey is challenging, regardless of sampling effort. This issue, more commonly known as imperfect detection, can have negative impacts on data quality and interpretation, most notably leading to false absences for rare or difficult‐to‐detect species. It is important that this issue be addressed, as estimates of species richness are critical to many areas of ecological research and management. In this study, we set out to determine the impacts of imperfect detection, and decisions about thresholds for inclusion in occupancy, on estimates of species richness and community structure. We collected data from a stream fish assemblage in Algonquin Provincial Park to be used as a representation of ecological communities. We then used multispecies occupancy modeling to estimate species‐specific occurrence probabilities while accounting for imperfect detection, thus creating a more informed dataset. This dataset was then compared to the original to see where differences occurred. In our analyses, we demonstrated that imperfect detection can lead to large changes in estimates of species richness at the site level and summarized differences in the community structure and sampling locations, represented through correspondence analyses.
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 | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.015 |
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".